Cases8000574/2025

Claimant v Grip-UK Ltd

18 March 2025Before Employment Judge Michelle SutherlandScotlandin person

Outcome

Other

Individual claims

Whistleblowingnot determined

This was an interim relief application only. The tribunal refused the application, finding the claimant did not have a 'pretty good chance' of showing he made protected disclosures or that dismissal was principally for that reason. The emails lacked sufficient factual specificity and context; the tribunal could not conclude on the limited material that protected disclosures were likely to be established. Further, given evidence of the claimant's frustration over lack of promotion and a heated exchange with a deputy manager, it was not sufficiently likely that any protected disclosure was the principal reason for dismissal. Full hearing required to determine the merits.

Facts

The claimant, a kitchen manager in hospitality, claimed he was dismissed for making protected disclosures about food safety and hygiene issues between October 2024 and February 2025. He had raised concerns about kitchen cleanliness, lack of hot water for handwashing, and staff hygiene practices. The respondent's position was that he was dismissed for inappropriate behaviour including upsetting colleagues over promotions and having a heated exchange with a deputy manager. HR conducted an investigation into bullying and harassment allegations against the claimant in February 2025.

Decision

The tribunal refused the interim relief application. It found the claimant did not have a sufficiently high likelihood of establishing that he made protected disclosures (the emails lacked factual specificity and context) or that any such disclosures were the principal reason for dismissal (given evidence of frustration over promotion, heated exchanges with colleagues, and an HR investigation into his behaviour). A full hearing with evidence is required to determine these contested matters.

Practical note

Interim relief applications in whistleblowing cases require more than allegations - the claimant must show a 'pretty good chance' that disclosures had sufficient factual content to be protected and were the principal reason for dismissal, not just a contributing factor among workplace conduct issues.

Legal authorities cited

Kilraine v London Borough of Wandsworth [2018] ICR 1850Taplin v C Shippam Ltd [1978] IRLR 450Ministry of Justice v Sarfraz [2011] IRLR 562Al Qasimi v Robinson EAT 0283/17Simpson v Cantor Fitzgerald Europe [2020] ICR 236

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.103AERA 1996 s.128ERA 1996 s.129ERA 1996 s.43AERA 1996 s.43B

Case details

Case number
8000574/2025
Decision date
18 March 2025
Hearing type
interim relief
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
hospitality
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Employment details

Role
Kitchen Manager (promoted during employment)
Service
10 months

Claimant representation

Represented
No