Claimant v Noble Foods Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the claimant failed to attend the interim relief hearing and instead went to work at her new job. The claim form did not provide sufficient details of what the protected disclosure was or evidence that dismissal was for whistleblowing rather than gross misconduct. The tribunal could not say it was likely the claimant would succeed.
The application for interim relief was dismissed. The claimant did not attend the hearing, having started new employment. The tribunal was not satisfied there were exceptional circumstances to postpone, and the respondent had not been properly served at their registered office. The tribunal could not be satisfied the claimant was likely to succeed with her underlying whistleblowing claim.
Facts
The claimant was employed as a Production Supervisor from August 2022 to June 2024 when she was dismissed for alleged misconduct. She claimed she was actually dismissed for whistleblowing about employees being underpaid. She applied for interim relief but did not attend the hearing, having started a new job the day before. The respondent also did not attend and had not been served at their registered office.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the interim relief application. The claimant failed to attend the hearing, choosing to work at her new job instead, which undermined her application for continuation of employment. The claim form did not provide sufficient details of the alleged protected disclosure or evidence that whistleblowing was the reason for dismissal rather than gross misconduct. The tribunal could not say it was likely the claimant would succeed.
Practical note
An interim relief application will fail if the claimant does not attend the hearing and the claim form fails to clearly identify the protected disclosure and provide a credible basis for believing whistleblowing was the reason for dismissal.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2601069/2024
- Decision date
- 28 February 2025
- Hearing type
- interim
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Name
- Noble Foods Ltd
- Sector
- food manufacturing
- Represented
- No
Employment details
- Role
- Production Supervisor
- Service
- 2 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No