Case No: A2/2010/2919/EATRF

Neutral Citation Number: [2011] EWCA Civ 1190

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM the EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
HHJ SEROTA QC, Profeor S R Cor!" #$% Mr I E&e'(e)
U*EAT+,-.,+-,+CEA
Royal Courts o !usti"e
#tran$% &on$on% WC2A 2&&
'ate: 2(/10/2011
Before /
LORD JUSTICE MUMMERY
LORD JUSTICE ELIAS
an$
LORD JUSTICE DAVIS
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Bet0ee$ /
NHS MANCHESTER A11e))#$t
2 #$% 2
FECITT 3 ORS
2 #$% 2
PUBLIC CONCERN #t 4OR*
Re1o$%e$t
I$ter5e$er
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Mr Tho6# L($%e$ QC #$% Mr J#6e Bo"% *instru"te$ by Mer H()) D(7'($o$ LLP+ or t,e
A11e))#$t
M D#1h$e Ro6$e" QC #$% M Y5ette B8%9 *instru"te$ by Mer :or5($ So)(7(tor+ or t,e
Re1o$%e$t
Mr Ro!($ A))e$ QC *instru"te$ by t,e -ntervener% P8!)(7 Co$7er$ At 4or'+
.earin/ $ate: 0 1"tober 2011
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
J8%;6e$
tLor% J8t(7e E)(# /
12 Ater a 12)$ay ,earin/ in t,e Em3loyment Tribunal in 4an",ester in t,e Autumn o
2009% t,e Tribunal ,el$ t,at t,e "laimants *as - 5ill "ontinue to "all t,em alt,ou/,
t,ey are t,e res3on$ents to t,is a33eal+ ,a$ not been unla5ully vi"timise$ by t,eir
em3loyers% t,e N.# 4an",ester *6t,e Em3loyer7+ "ontrary to se"tion 89: o t,e
Em3loyment Ri/,ts A"t 1990% or ma;in/ a 3rote"te$ $is"losure2 T,e "laimants
su""essully a33eale$ to t,e Em3loyment A33eal Tribunal *6t,e EAT7+ on t5o
/roun$s2 First% t,e EAT a33ears to ,ave "on"lu$e$ t,at t,e Em3loyment Tribunal $i$
not a33ly% or may not ,ave 3ro3erly a33lie$% t,e a33ro3riate test in $eterminin/
5,et,er or not $etriments suere$ by t,e "laimants 5ere be"ause o t,e 3rote"te$
$is"losures2 #e"on$% t,e EAT ,el$ t,at t,e Tribunal ,a$ aile$ to "onsi$er 5,et,er or
not t,e Em3loyer 5as vi"ariously liable or a"ts o its em3loyees $ire"te$ a/ainst t,e
"laimants amountin/ to vi"timisation or ma;in/ t,e 3rote"te$ $is"losure2 T,e matter
5as remitte$ to t,e same Em3loyment Tribunal to re"onsi$er its $e"ision in t,e li/,t
o t,e EAT rulin/2 T,e Em3loyer no5 a33eals a/ainst t,e EAT <u$/ment an$ see;s to
,ave t,e or$er o t,e Em3loyment Tribunal reinstate$2
22 -n a$$ition to re3resentation by t,e 3arties% 5e ,ave ,a$ t,e beneit o bot, 5ritten
an$ oral submissions rom 4r Allen =C% a"tin/ or t,e -nterveners% >ubli" Con"ern at
Wor;2 T,is is a ",arity 5,i", $es"ribes itsel as 6t,e 5,istle blo5in/ ",arity7 an$
a$vises em3loyers an$ 5or;ers2 Amon/st ot,er t,in/s it 3rovi$es a ree a$vi"e line to
5or;ers 5,o are "on"erne$ about some 5ron/$oin/ at 5or; an$ $o not ;no5 5,at
t,ey s,oul$ $o about it2
The statutory provisions.
?2 T,e >ubli" -nterest 'is"losure A"t 199@ inserte$ a ne5 >art -A A into t,e
Em3loyment Ri/,ts A"t 19902 T,e lon/ title to t,e A"t $es"ribes it as:
6An A"t to 3rote"t in$ivi$uals 5,o ma;e "ertain $is"losures o
inormation in t,e 3ubli" interest: to allo5 su", in$ivi$uals to
brin/ a"tion in res3e"t o vi"timisationB an$ or "onne"te$
3ur3oses27
- s,all reer to in$ivi$uals 5,o ma;e su", 3ubli" interest $is"losures in /oo$ ait, as
65,istleblo5ers7% as t,ey are "olloCuially ;no5n2
82 -n summary orm t,e statute o3erates as ollo5s2 A 5or;er ,as t,e ri/,t not to be
sub<e"te$ to an a"t o vi"timisation by ,is em3loyer or ma;in/ 5,at is terme$ 6a
3rote"te$ $is"losure72 A 3rote"te$ $is"losure is a Cualiyin/ $is"losure as $eine$ by
se"tion 8?: o t,e 1990 A"t2 -t is t,e $is"losure o inormation 5,i",% in t,e reasonable
belie o t,e 5or;er ma;in/ t,e $is"losure% ten$s to s,o5 t,at "ertain 5ron/$oin/ may
,ave o""urre$2 T,is in"lu$es% or eDam3le% t,at t,ere may be or may ,ave been a
"riminal oen"e "ommitte$% or a mis"arria/e o <usti"e% or t,at t,e ,ealt, an$ saety o
a 3erson ,as been or may be a$versely ae"te$2 T,e $is"losure must be ma$e in /oo$
ait, to an a33ro3riate 3erson 5,i", in"lu$es% by se"tion 8?C% an em3loyer2
(2 #e"tion 89: t,en 3rovi$es as ollo5s:
6*1+ A 5or;er ,as t,e ri/,t not to be sub<e"te$ to any $etriment by any a"t% or any
$eliberate ailure to a"t% by ,is em3loyer $one on t,e /roun$ t,at t,e 5or;er ,as
ma$e a 3rote"te$ $is"losure2
*2+ ED"e3t 5,ere t,e 5or;er is an em3loyee 5,o is $ismisse$ in "ir"umstan"es in
5,i",% by virtue o se"tion 199% >art E $oes not a33ly to t,e $ismissal% t,is
se"tion $oes not a33ly 5,ereF
*a+ t,e 5or;er is an em3loyee% an$
*b+ t,e $etriment in Cuestion amounts to $ismissal *5it,in t,e meanin/ o t,at
>art+2
12 T,ere are a number o eatures to note about t,is se"tion2 First% t,e 3rote"tion is /iven
to 5or;ers an$ not merely em3loyees2 T,e "on"e3t o 5or;er is 5i$ely $eine$ in
se"tion 8?G an$ in"lu$es% or eDam3le% a/en"y 5or;ers2 #e"on$% t,e 5or;er is
3rote"te$ only a/ainst a"ts or omissions by his employer. T,ere is no se3arate
3rote"tion aor$e$ to a"ts o vi"timisation 3er3etrate$ by ello5 5or;ers2 T,ir$%
5,ere t,e "om3laint is t,at t,ere ,as been an omission or ailure to a"t% it 5ill nee$ to
be a $eliberate ailure in or$er to attra"t t,e 3rote"tion o t,is se"tion2 Fourt,% t,e
$etriment suere$ by t,e 5or;er must be $one on the ground that ,e ,as ma$e a
3rote"te$ $is"losure2 Fit,% in t,e "ase o em3loyees% but not t,ose 5or;ers 5,o are
not em3loyees% 5,ere t,e $etriment o 5,i", t,e em3loyee "om3lains ta;es t,e orm
o a $ismissal t,en t,e 3rote"tion is aor$e$ not by se"tion 89: but by t,e unair
$ismissal 3rovisions in >art E o t,e 1990 A"t2 T,e unair $ismissal 3rovisions 5ere
amen$e$ by t,e 199@ A"t an$ a ne5 se"tion 10?A 5as inserte$ as ollo5s:
6An em3loyee 5,o is $ismisse$ s,all be re/ar$e$ or t,e
3ur3oses o t,is >art as unairly $ismisse$ i t,e reason *or i
more t,an one% t,e 3rin"i3al reason+ or t,e $ismissal is t,at t,e
em3loyee ma$e a 3rote"te$ $is"losure27
82 -t is to be note$ t,at in t,e $ismissal "onteDt it is eD3ressly 3rovi$e$ t,at t,e 3rote"te$
$is"losure must be t,e reason or t,e 3rin"i3al reason or t,e $ismissal beore t,at
$ismissal "an be oun$ to be automati"ally unair2 A Cuestion 5,i", arises in t,is "ase
is 5,et,er t,e same test s,oul$ be a33lie$ to a 5or;er 5,o is sub<e"t to a $etriment
s,ort o $ismissal in or$er to $etermine 5,et,er ,e or s,e "an su""ee$ in a "laim
un$er se"tion 89:2
(2 -n "ases 5,ere t,e 5,istleblo5er is "om3lainin/ t,at t,e em3loyer ,as sub<e"te$ ,im
to a $etriment s,ort o $ismissal% se"tion 8@*2+ 3rovi$es t,at t,e onus is on t,e
em3loyer to s,o5 t,e /roun$ on 5,i", any a"t% or ailure to a"t% 5as $one2
The facts.
02 T,e "laimants are re/istere$ nurses 5it, many years o "lini"al eD3erien"e2 T,ey 5ere
5or;in/ at t,e Wal;)-n Centre at Wyt,ens,a5e% Hreater 4an",ester2 4rs Fe"itt 5as a
"lini"al "o)or$inator or Wal;)-n Centres 5it, mana/erial res3onsibility or t,e
nursin/ sta at Wyt,ens,a5e2 4rs Woo$"o"; 5as a 3rimary "are nurse 5,o 5or;e$
3rin"i3ally% but not eD"lusively% at Wyt,ens,a5e2 4rs .u/,es 5as a ban; nurse2 #,e
/enerally 5or;e$ 12 ,our s,its 3er 5ee; at Wyt,ens,a5e but s,e also ,el$ a 3art
time 3osition at a H> 3ra"ti"e else5,ere2
92 -n early 200@ 4rs Woo$"o"; 5as "on"erne$ about t,e a"t t,at a ello5 "ollea/ue
5or;in/ as a /eneral nurse% 4r 'aniel #5it% 5as ma;in/ 5,at s,e believe$ to be
alse statements to ot,er members o sta about ,is "lini"al eD3erien"e an$
Cualii"ations2 For eDam3le% s,e ,ear$ ,im tell a stu$ent nurse t,at ,e ,a$ been a
",ar/e nurse in A""i$ent I Emer/en"y or ( years 5,ereas in a"t 4rs Woo$"o";
;ne5 t,at ,e ,a$ only been Cualiie$ or about ( years2 #,e eD3resse$ ,er "on"erns to
4rs Fe"itt 5,o "arrie$ out some resear", an$ $is"overe$ t,at 4r #5it 5as only
Cualiie$ as a ",il$renJs nurse2 4rs Fe"itt raise$ "on"erns about 4r #5itJs la"; o
,is 3roesse$ Cualii"ations to ,er line mana/er% 4rs Coates2 T,e ot,er t5o "laimants
su33orte$ 4rs Fe"itt2 -t is not $is3ute$ t,at t,ese 5ere 3rote"te$ $is"losures as
$eine$ by se"tion 8?A o t,e 1990 A"t2 T,ey 5ere Cualiyin/ $is"losures 5it,in t,e
meanin/ o se"tion 8?:*$+ sin"e all t,ree "laimants reasonably believe$ t,at t,eir
$is"losures ten$e$ to s,o5 t,at t,e ,ealt, an$ saety o in$ivi$uals ,a$ been% or 5as
li;ely to be% en$an/ere$% an$ t,ey 5ere ma$e in /oo$ ait, to t,eir em3loyer2
@2 4r #5it a";no5le$/e$ to 4rs Coates t,at ,e ,a$ eDa//erate$ ,is Cualii"ations to
"ollea/ues% alt,ou/, not to t,e Em3loyer itsel2 .e a3olo/ise$ an$ "onirme$ t,at ,is
lies 5oul$ not be re3eate$2 4rs Coates 5as 3re3are$ to leave it at t,at2
92 T,e "laimants 5ere not satisie$ 5it, t,is res3onse an$ sou/,t to 3ursue t,e matter
urt,er2 T,is "ause$ "ertain $issatisa"tion amon/st some o t,eir "ollea/ues% 5,o
"onsi$ere$ t,at t,ey 5ere sub<e"tin/ 4r #5it to a 65it", ,unt72 T,e 5or;or"e
$ivi$e$ into t,ree /rou3s: t,ose su33ortin/ 4r #5it% t,ose si$in/ 5it, t,e "laimants%
an$ t,ose 5,o $i$ not 5is, to ta;e si$es2
102 :e"ause o 4rs Fe"ittJs 3ersisten"e in 3ursuin/ t,e matter% 4r #5it 5as intervie5e$
a/ain% t,is time by a 4rs Ger5in2 4r #5it in turn be"ame eDtremely $istrau/,tB t,ere
5ere "on"erns about ,is mental state an$ ,e 5as t,reatenin/ to "ommit sui"i$e2 4rs
Ger5inJs vie5 5as t,e same as 4rs CoatesJ% namely t,at 4r #5it ,a$ a";no5le$/e$
,is 5ron/$oin/% /iven assuran"es t,at ,is "on$u"t 5oul$ not be re3eate$% an$ t,at t,e
issue s,oul$ not be ta;en any urt,er2
112 4r #5it lo$/e$ a bullyin/ an$ ,arassment "om3laint a/ainst 4rs Fe"itt on ? A3ril
200@2 .e a33arently in$i"ate$ at one sta/e t,at ,e 5is,e$ to 5it,$ra5 t,e "om3laint%
but t,ere 5as a ,earin/ nonet,eless2 T,e "on"lusion 5as t,at 4rs Fe"itt ,a$ not been
/uilty o bullyin/ or ,arassment% alt,ou/, Cuestions 5ere raise$ about ,er
mana/ement style2 T,e Tribunal "ate/ori"ally re<e"te$ t,e "ontention t,at 4r #5it
,a$ been en"oura/e$ to 3ursue t,at "om3laint by mana/ement2
122 4r #5it 5as or a 5,ile sus3en$e$ rom $uty% an$ 4rs Fe"itt ma$e a ormal
"om3laint un$er t,e Em3loyerJs 5,istle blo5in/ 3oli"y2 T,e "laimants 5ere sub<e"te$
to "ertain ,ostile an$ un3leasant a"ts as a result o "ontinuin/ to 3ursue t,is matter2
For t,e most 3art t,ese a"ts 5ere not s3e"ii"ally i$entiie$ by t,e Tribunal but t,e
"laimantsJ "laim orms alle/e t,at t,ey 5ere sub<e"te$ to isolation an$ $aily 3ersonal
insults2 T,e Tribunal $i$ re"ount t5o in"i$ents $ire"te$ at 4rs Fe"itt2 At t,e en$ o
4ar", s,e ,a$ an anonymous tele3,one "all t,reatenin/ to burn $o5n ,er ,ouse
unless s,e 5it,$re5 ,er "om3laint about 4r #5it2 Also ,er 3i"ture 5as $is3laye$ on
Fa"eboo; in "ir"umstan"es "ausin/ ,er $istress2
1?2 #enior mana/ement 5ere "on"erne$ about t,e $ysun"tional ee"t t,at t,ese
$evelo3ments 5ere ,avin/ on t,e sta an$ trie$ to en"oura/e t,e sta to 5or;
3roessionally 5it, ea", ot,er2 T,e Tribunal "on"lu$e$ t,at no real attem3t 5as
ma$e to i$entiy t,e a$verse be,aviour to 5,i", t,e "laimants ,a$ been sub<e"te$% nor
$i$ mana/ement "onsi$er 5,et,er it mi/,t be ne"essary to t,reaten $is"i3linary
san"tions to 3revent t,e situation rom es"alatin/2
182 T,e atmos3,ere in t,e Centre $eteriorate$ si/nii"antly2 -n 4ay% 4rs Fe"itt ,a$ ,er
mana/ement un"tions remove$ rom ,er2 At about t,at time >roessor 4a$,o;% t,e
Em3loyerJs 4e$i"al 'ire"tor% revie5e$ t,e 3osition2 .e 3ro$u"e$ an interim re3ort in
5,i", ,e "on"lu$e$ t,at t,ere 5ere no "on"erns about 4r #5itJs "om3eten"e an$ ,is
sus3ension 5as t,en lite$2 -n ,is inal re3ort% >roessor 4a$,o; a/ree$ 5it, 4rs
Ger5in t,at no urt,er a"tion s,oul$ be ta;en a/ainst 4r #5it% but ,e also oun$ t,at
4rs Fe"itt ,a$ been <ustiie$ bot, in initially raisin/ t,e matter an$ also in 3ursuin/ it
to senior mana/ement level2 .e "riti"ise$ mana/ement or not bein/ sui"iently
robust2
1(2 All t,e "laimants lo$/e$ /rievan"es alt,ou/, only t,at o 4rs .u/,es 5as ultimately
3ursue$ to a ,earin/2 .er /rievan"e 5as ,ear$ by 4rs NiDon% 5,o oun$ t,at 4rs
.u/,es ,a$ been sub<e"te$ to treatment 5,i", ,a$ resulte$ in ,er bein/ isolate$ an$
3re<u$i"e$2 #,e also "onsi$ere$ t,at mana/ement "oul$ ,ave $one more to 3revent
t,is2 Alt,ou/, 4rs NiDon ma$e no in$in/s 5it, res3e"t to t,e ot,er t5o "laimants%
t,e Tribunal 5ere satisie$ t,at ,a$ s,e $one so% s,e 5oul$ ,ave rea",e$ t,e same
"on"lusion about mana/ementJs ailin/s2 T,e Tribunal "on"urre$ in t,at analysis2
102 #ubseCuently% senior mana/ement remove$ 4rs Fe"itt an$ 4rs Woo$"o"; rom t,e
Wyt,ens,a5e Centre an$ t,ey 5ere re$e3loye$ else5,ere2 At about t,e same time t,e
Em3loyer% a"tin/ t,rou/, a 4rs &a;e% sto33e$ oerin/ s,its to 4rs .u/,es2
192 .avin/ set out t,e ,istory% t,e Tribunal t,en summarise$ 5,at it "onsi$ere$ to be its
essential a"tual "on"lusions in t,e ollo5in/ terms:
6T,ere 5as% o "ourse% ar more evi$en"e /iven to t,e Tribunal
in relation to t,e relevant events t,an "an be summarise$ in
t,ese reasons2 .o5ever% ,avin/ "onsi$ere$ t,e totality o t,e
evi$en"e 3resente$ to it% t,e Tribunal ma;es t,e ollo5in/
in$in/s o a"t:)
*a+ As a""e3te$ by t,e res3on$ent% ea", o t,ese "laimants
ma$e 3rote"te$ $is"losures $urin/ 4ar",/A3ril 200@ 5,i",
relate$ to 4r #5it2
*b+ As a $ire"t result o t,ose $is"losures% t,e "laimants 5ere
sub<e"t to un3leasant be,aviour on t,e 3art o a number o
members o sta at t,e Wyt,ens,a5e Wal;)-n Centre 5,o 5ere
su33ortive o 4r #5it an$ 5,o elt t,at t,e "laimants% an$ in
3arti"ular 4rs Fe"itt% 5ere sub<e"tin/ 4r #5it to an
un5arrante$ 65it", ,unt72 T,e Tribunal 5as satisie$% as
in$ee$ 5ere >roessor 4a$,o; an$ 4rs NiDon% t,at t,e
"laimants 5ere <ustiie$ in raisin/ t,e issue relatin/ to 4r #5it
an$ to 3ursue it urt,er 5,en imme$iate line mana/ement
$e"i$e$ to ta;e no urt,er a"tion2
*"+ :e"ause o t,e 6$ysun"tional7 *as oun$ by mana/ement+
situation at t,e Wal;)-n Centre 5,i", ollo5e$ t,e 3rote"te$
$is"losures ma$e by t,e "laimants% t,ey 5ere sub<e"te$ to
si/nii"ant $etriment% in"lu$in/ in t,e "ases o 4rs Fe"itt an$
4rs Woo$"o";% bein/ remove$ a/ainst t,eir 5is,es rom t,e
Wyt,ens,a5e Wal;)-n Centre2
*$+ #o ar as 4rs .u/,es is "on"erne$% alt,ou/, t,ere 5as
some "onusion as to 5,et,er s,e ,a$ ,ersel $e"i$e$ not to
5or; any more s,its or 5,et,er t,ey 5ere remove$ rom ,er%
t,e $esire by 4rs &a;e to re$u"e ,er ,ours to nil 5as% at least
in 3art% relate$ to t,e 6$ysun"tional7 situation t,at eDiste$ at
t,e Centre an$ 5,i", ,a$ resulte$ in 4rs Fe"itt an$ 4rs
Woo$"o"; bein/ re$e3loye$2
*e+ 4ana/ement "oul$ an$ s,oul$ ,ave $one more t,an it $i$
to 3revent t,e "laimants rom bein/ sub<e"te$ to t,e un3leasant
an$ un5arrante$ be,aviour on t,e 3art o ot,er members o
sta at t,e Centre 5,o 5ere su33ortive o 4r #5it27
1@2 T,e "laimants alle/e$ t,at t,e a"tions ta;en a/ainst t,em 5ere be"ause t,ey ,a$ ma$e
3rote"te$ $is"losures an$ 5ere t,ereore in brea", o t,eir ri/,ts un$er se"tion 89: o
t,e 1990 A"t2 T,ey "om3laine$ not only o t,e 3ositive a"ts ta;en by t,e Em3loyer%
namely t,e re$e3loyment o 4rs Fe"itt an$ 4rs Woo$"o"; an$ t,e removal o s,its
rom 4rs .u/,es% but also o t,e ailure by t,e Em3loyer to ta;e 3ro3er ste3s to
3revent vi"timisation by "ollea/ues2 T,ey also alle/e$ t,at Cuite se3arately rom t,e
Cuestion 5,et,er t,e Em3loyer 5as 3ersonally liable or its a"tions% t,e Em3loyer
5as in any event vi"ariously liable or t,e a"ts o vi"timisation 3er3etrate$ by ello5
5or;ers in t,e "ourse o t,eir em3loyment2
The Employment Tribunals conclusions.
192 T,e Tribunal irst "onsi$ere$ 5,at t,e 3ro3er test 5as to $etermine 5,et,er or not t,e
vi"timisation ,a$ been 6on t,e /roun$ t,at7 t,e "laimants ,a$ ma$e a 3rote"te$
$is"losure2 -t re<e"te$ a "ontention a$van"e$ by "ounsel or t,e "laimants t,at a 6but
or7 test s,oul$ be a$o3te$ to $etermine liability2 #o t,e a"t t,at but or t,e $is"losure
t,e "laimants 5oul$ not ,ave suere$ t,e $etriments t,ey $i$ 5as not enou/, to iD
t,e Em3loyer 5it, liability2 T,e Em3loyer "on"lu$e$ t,at an a"t 5oul$ only be 6on
t,e /roun$ o7 a 3rote"te$ $is"losure 5it,in t,e meanin/ o se"tion 89: i it "oul$ be
sai$ t,at t,e a"t *or $eliberate omission+ 5as be"ause o t,e 3rote"te$ $is"losure2 T,is
is a$o3tin/ t,e 6reason 5,y7 a33roa", no5 re"o/nise$ to be t,e a33ro3riate test in
t,e "onteDt o anti)$is"rimination 3rovisions 5,ere t,e le/islative ormula is t,e same
or very similar: see e2/2 t,e 5ell ;no5n 3assa/es in t,e <u$/ment o &or$ Ni",olls in
Nagarajan v London Regional Transport [1999] -CR @99% @@8E)F% an$ in Chief
Constable of West or!shire v "han [2001] -CR 100(2 T,ese aut,orities 5ere
ollo5e$ in t,e "onteDt o se"tion 89: by 4r Re"or$er Kn$er,ill =C% as ,e t,en 5as%
in London #orough of $arro% v "night [200?] -R&R 180% a $e"ision eD3ressly
reerre$ to by t,e Em3loyment Tribunal in t,is "ase2
202 A$o3tin/ t,is a33roa",% t,e Tribunal ,el$ t,at t,e Em3loyer ,a$ not brea",e$ se"tion
89:2 -t irst "onsi$ere$ 5,et,er t,e Em3loyer "oul$ be liable or its omission in
ailin/ a$eCuately to 3revent t,e situation arisin/ 5,ereby t,e "laimants 5ere sub<e"t
to t,e a"ts o ,arassment rom sta2 T,e Tribunal ,el$ on t,e a"ts t,at it "oul$ not
*3ara ?@+:
6-t is not sui"ient% in t,e TribunalJs <u$/ment% to establis,
liability on t,e res3on$ent sim3ly be"ause mana/ement eit,er
$i$ not $o as mu", as it "oul$ ,ave $one or 5as sim3ly
unsu""essul in its attem3ts to resolve matters2 .o5ever ,ar$
mana/ement mi/,t try% t,ere are sometimes situations t,at arise
in t,e 5or;or"e ollo5in/ a 3rote"te$ $is"losure ,avin/ been
ma$e 5,i", are eDtremely $ii"ult to "ontrol an$ 3revent2
W,ilst a reasonable level o 3roa"tive en/a/ement 5it, a vie5
to 3revent su", a situations "ontinuin/ "an be eD3e"te$% any
ailin/s by mana/ement in t,is "ase to se"ure t,e $esire$ result
5ere not sui"ient% in t,e TribunalJs <u$/ment% to amount to a
$eliberate ailure to a"t27
T,e Tribunal urt,er ,el$ t,at any ailure by t,e Em3loyer to ta;e a33ro3riate ste3s
5as in any event not be"ause t,e "laimants ,a$ ma$e a 3rote"te$ $is"losure2
212 T,e Tribunal t,en o"use$ on t,e 3ositive a"ts o t,e Em3loyer an$ "on"lu$e$ t,at
neit,er 4rs2 Fe"itt nor 4rs Woo$"o"; ,a$ been re$e3loye$ a5ay rom Wyt,ens,a5e
be"ause t,ey ,a$ ma$e a 3rote"te$ $is"losure *3ara 81+:
6ECually% 5,en t,e $e"ision 5as ma$e by mana/ement to
re$e3loy 4rs Fe"itt an$ 4rs Woo$"o"; in !une 200@ a5ay
rom t,e Wyt,ens,a5e Wal;)-n Centre% t,at 5as be"ause t,e
situation at t,e Centre ,a$ ren$ere$ it 6$ysun"tional7 su", t,at
t,eir removal a33eare$ to mana/ement to be t,e only easible
met,o$ o resolvin/ t,e 3roblem2 -t 5as not 6be"ause7 t,e
"laimants ,a$ ma$e 3rote"te$ $is"losures% an$ 5as t,ereore
not $one 6on t,e /roun$ t,at7 su", 3rote"te$ $is"losures ,a$
been ma$e27
222 T,e Tribunal $i$ not s3ell out 5,y mana/ement t,ou/,t t,at t,e only easible 5ay o
resolvin/ t,e 3roblem 5as to remove t,ese t5o 5,istleblo5ers rat,er t,an t,ose 5,o
,a$ sub<e"te$ t,em to a"ts o ,arassment2 .o5ever% it 5as 3lainly satisie$ t,at it 5as
mana/ementJs /enuine vie5 t,at t,is 5as t,e "ase2
2?2 A similar "on"lusion 5as rea",e$ 5it, res3e"t to 4rs .u/,es% not5it,stan$in/ t,at
4rs &a;e% t,e mana/er 5,o ,a$ "ease$ to oer ,er s,its% ,a$% 5,en ta;in/ a$vi"e as
to 5,et,er s,e "oul$ $o t,is% $es"ribe$ 4rs .u/,es as a 6trouble "auser27 T,e
TribunalJs "on"lusion 5as as ollo5s *3ara 82+:
6#o ar as t,e "laimant 4rs .u/,es is "on"erne$%
not5it,stan$in/ t,e email rom #ara, &a;e to .R $ate$ 9 !une
200@% t,e Tribunal 5as satisie$ rom t,e evi$en"e t,at it 5as
not 6be"ause7 o 4rs .u/,esJs involvement in ma;in/ t,e
3rote"te$ $is"losures t,at #ara, &a;e 5is,e$ to re$u"e ,er
ban; s,its to nil but 3rin"i3ally be"ause o a ne/ative vie5 s,e
,el$ o 4rs .u/,es 5,i", 3re)$ate$ t,e ma;in/ o t,e
$is"losures an$ 3artly or t,e same reason t,at 4rs Fe"itt an$
4rs Woo$"o"; 5ere re$e3loye$% namely to resolve t,e
6$ysun"tional7 3roblem at t,e Centre2 A""or$in/ly% t,e ailure
to 3rovi$e 4rs .u/,es 5it, urt,er s,its 5as not 6on t,e
/roun$ t,at7 s,e ,a$ ma$e a 3rote"te$ $is"losure27
282 Alt,ou/, t,e issue o vi"arious liability ,a$ been raise$ 5it, t,e Em3loyment
Tribunal% it ma$e no rulin/ on 5,et,er as a matter o 3rin"i3le su", liability "oul$
arise un$er t,is le/islation 5,ere no liability is im3ose$ on t,e 5or;ers nor% i it
"oul$% 5,et,er t,e Em3loyer 5as vi"ariously liable on t,e a"ts o t,is "ase2
The appeal to the E&T.
2(2 T,e EAT *.. !u$/e #erota =C 3resi$in/+ "onsi$ere$ t,ree /roun$s o a33eal2 -t
3erem3torily re<e"te$ an alle/ation t,at t,e Em3loyment Tribunal ,a$ 5ron/ly 3la"e$
t,e bur$en o 3roo u3on t,e "laimants2 T,e ot,er t5o /roun$s% ,o5ever% su""ee$e$2
202 T,e irst 5as t,at t,e Em3loyment Tribunal ,a$ not i$entiie$ t,e a33ro3riate
stan$ar$ o 3roo or $eterminin/ 5,et,er a 3rote"te$ $is"losure ,a$ been a reason
or t,e $etrimental treatment so as to /ive rise to liability un$er se"tion 89:2 -n or$er
to $is",ar/e t,e bur$en im3ose$ on it% t,e EAT ,el$ t,at t,e Em3loyer ,a$ to satisy
t,e Tribunal t,at t,e a$verse treatment aor$e$ to t,ese "laimants 5as 6in no sense
5,atsoever7 on t,e /roun$s t,at t,e "laimants ,a$ ma$e a 3rote"te$ $is"losure2 T,e
EAT ,el$ t,at a broa$ vie5 o t,e le/islation s,oul$ be ta;en in or$er to 3rovi$e
3ro3er 3rote"tion to 5,istleblo5ers2 Furt,ermore it "onsi$ere$ itsel obli/e$ to
ollo5 t,e $e"ision o t,e Court o A33eal in 'gen v Wong [200(] -CR 9?12 T,at 5as a
"ase o ra"e $is"rimination in 5,i", >eter Hibson &!% /ivin/ t,e <u$/ment o t,e
Court *Genne$y% >eter Hibson an$ #"ott :a;er &!!+% ,el$ t,at t,e 6in no sense
5,atsoever7 test 5as t,e reCuirement im3ose$ by EK la5 in t,e :ur$en o >roo
'ire"tive 99/@0 on"e a "laimant ,a$ establis,e$ a 3rima a"ie "ase o $is"rimination2
*-n a"t% as >eter Hibson &! ma$e "lear 5,en $ealin/ 5it, some observations o &or$
Ni",olls in t,e Nagarajan "ase% i t,e 3ros"ribe$ reason 3laye$ only a trivial 3art in
t,e $e"ision% so t,at it is not a material "onsi$eration% t,at 5oul$ not "reate liability2
T,e 3ros"ribe$ /roun$ 5oul$ ,ave to be a material% in t,e sense o more t,an trivial%
inluen"e on t,e $e"ision: see 3aras ?()?9+2 T,e EAT re"o/nise$ t,at t,e 5,istle)
blo5in/ le/islation is ,ome)/ro5n an$ $oes not /ive ee"t to EK 'ire"tives as t,e
$is"rimination la5s $o% but nonet,eless "onsi$ere$ t,at it 5as boun$ by t,e 'gen
$e"ision to a$o3t t,e same a33roa",2 #ur3risin/ly% ,avin/ $etermine$ t,at t,is 5as
t,e a33ro3riate test or t,e stan$ar$ o 3roo% t,e EAT $i$ not t,en /o on to analyse
t,e Tribunal $e"ision to see 5,et,er its a33roa", 5as in"onsistent 5it, t,e a33li"ation
o t,is test2 .o5ever% sin"e it reerre$ t,e "ase ba"; to t,e Tribunal% t,e assum3tion
must be t,at t,e EAT 5as not satisie$ t,at t,e result 5oul$ ne"essarily ,ave been t,e
same i t,e 3ro3er test ,a$ been i$entiie$ an$ a33lie$ by t,e Tribunal2
292 T,e se"on$ /roun$ on 5,i", t,e "laimants su""ee$e$ beore t,e EAT 5as in relation
to t,e Cuestion o vi"arious liability2 T,e EAT ,el$ t,at t,e em3loyers 5oul$ be
vi"ariously liable or a"ts o vi"timisation by ello5 em3loyees $ire"te$ at t,e
"laimants be"ause t,ey ,a$ ma$e 3rote"te$ $is"losures% 3rovi$e$ t,ese a"ts 5ere
"ommitte$ in t,e "ourse o em3loyment2 T,e EAT ,el$ t,at t,is 5as so
not5it,stan$in/ t,at t,e em3loyees are not t,emselves le/ally liable un$er t,e statute
or t,eir o5n a"ts o vi"timisation2 -n rea",in/ t,at "on"lusion t,e EAT ollo5e$ an
earlier EAT $e"ision% Cumbria County Council v Carlisle()organ [2009] -R&R ?18
*.. !u$/e Rei$ =C 3resi$in/+% in 5,i", it 5as ,el$ t,at to in$ an em3loyer
vi"ariously liable in t,ese "ir"umstan"es 5as in a""or$an"e 5it, t,e rulin/ o t,e
.ouse o &or$s in )ajro%s!i v *uys and +t Thomas N$+ Employer [2000] KG.&
?8B [2009] 1 AC 2282 #in"e t,e Em3loyment Tribunal ,a$ not analyse$ on t,e a"ts
5,et,er t,e em3loyees ,a$ "ommitte$ a"ts o vi"timisation in t,e "ourse o t,eir
em3loyment% t,e "ase 5as remitte$ to it to $o so2
The grounds of appeal.
2@2 T,e Em3loyer ",allen/es t,e EATJs analysis o bot, t,e issues on 5,i", it oun$ or
t,e "laimants2
,icarious liability.
292 First% t,e Em3loyer submits t,at t,e EAT erre$ in la5 in ,ol$in/ t,at t,e Em3loyer
"oul$ in 3rin"i3le be vi"ariously liable or t,e a"ts o vi"timisation o its em3loyees in
"ir"umstan"es 5,ere t,e em3loyees ,a$ "ommitte$ no le/al 5ron/2 - "an $eal 5it,
t,is /roun$ very briely2 T,e .ouse o &or$s ,as unambi/uously ,el$ t,at an
em3loyer "an be vi"ariously liable only or t,e le/al 5ron/s o its em3loyees2 -n
)ajro%s!i &or$ Ni",olls $eine$ vi"arious liability as ollo5s *3ara 9+:
6Ai"arious liability is a "ommon la5 3rin"i3le o stri"t% no)ault
liability2 Kn$er t,is 3rin"i3le a blameless em3loyer is liable or
a 5ron/ "ommitte$ by ,is em3loyee 5,ile t,e latter is about
,is em3loyerJs business2 22T,e 3rimary liability is t,at o t,e
em3loyee 5,o "ommitte$ t,e 5ron/27
?02 Absent any le/al 5ron/ by t,e em3loyee% t,ere is no room or t,e $o"trine to o3erate2
.ere% in "ontrast to t,e $is"rimination le/islation 5,ere in$ivi$uals may be 3ersonally
liable or t,eir a"ts o vi"timisation ta;en a/ainst t,ose 5,o 3ursue $is"rimination
"laims% t,ere is no 3rovision ma;in/ it unla5ul or 5or;ers to vi"timise
5,istleblo5ers2 -t 5as solely on t,e /roun$ o su", alle/e$ vi"timisation t,at it 5as
sou/,t to ma;e t,e Em3loyer vi"ariously liable% an$ t,ereore t,e "laim "oul$ not
su""ee$2 1 "ourse% as 4s Romney% Counsel or t,e Res3on$ents% submits% $e3en$in/
on t,e nature o t,e a"t o vi"timisation% t,e em3loyee mi/,t be "ommittin/ ot,er
5ron/s or 5,i", t,e em3loyer "oul$ be vi"ariously liable2 For eDam3le% a "ourse o
,arassment may /ive rise to liability un$er t,e >rote"tion rom .arassment A"t an$
any assault 5oul$ amount to a tort or 5,i", an em3loyer mi/,t be vi"ariously liable2
:ut no s3e"ii" le/al 5ron/s o t,is nature 5ere eit,er relie$ u3on or establis,e$ ,ere%
an$ in$ee$ t,e Em3loyment Tribunal 5oul$ not ,ave ,a$ <uris$i"tion to $eal 5it,
t,em2
?12 T,e Cumbria "ase% 5,i", t,e EAT in t,is "ase ollo5e$% 5as 5ron/ly $e"i$e$2 -n
Cumbria t,e EAT 5as un$er t,e misa33re,ension t,at t,e $e"ision in )ajro%s!i
meant t,at t,e em3loyer "oul$ be liable or a"ts o t,e em3loyee "ommitte$ $urin/ t,e
"ourse o ,is em3loyment 5,et,er or not t,ose a"ts "onstitute$ an a"tionable 5ron/
a/ainst t,e "om3lainant em3loyee2 T,at analysis 5as base$ on a mis"on"e3tion o
5,at &or$ Ni",olls 5as sayin/ in 3ara/ra3, 18 o t,e )ajro%s!i $e"ision2 .e 5as
t,ere $es"ribin/ a line o reasonin/ a$o3te$ in a $e"ision o t,e Australian .i/, Court
5,i",% in 3ara/ra3, 1(% ,e sai$ ,a$ no5 been irmly $is"ar$e$ in En/lis, la52 .e
a$$e$ in t,at 3ara/ra3, t,at t,e 3rin"i3le t,at an em3loyer 5as liable or t,e 5ron/s
o ,is em3loyees "ommitte$ $urin/ t,e "ourse o t,eir em3loyment 5as no5 6settle$
la527 T,e 3rin"i3le un$erlyin/ t,e $o"trine is t,at t,e em3loyeeJs 5ron/ is im3ute$ to
t,e em3loyer2
?22 -t ollo5s t,at% in my <u$/ment% t,e EAT erre$ in ollo5in/ t,e Cumbria "ase an$ in
remittin/ t,e issue o vi"arious liability to t,e Em3loyment Tribunal2 A""or$in/ly%
t,is /roun$ o a33eal su""ee$s2
The causation test.
??2 T,e se"on$ /roun$ o a33eal is $ire"te$ at t,e EATJs $e"ision to remit to t,e
Em3loyment Tribunal t,e Cuestion o t,e em3loyerJs 3ersonal liability% a33arently on
t,e 3remise t,at t,e Tribunal ,a$ erre$ in its a33roa", to "ausation2
?82 4r &in$en =C% "ounsel or t,e Em3loyer% ma;es t5o 3oints 5it, res3e"t to t,is
/roun$2 T,e irst is t,at t,e reasonin/ o t,e Em3loyment Tribunal $emonstrates t,at
even i t,e EAT 5as "orre"t in "on"lu$in/ t,at t,e Em3loyer "oul$ $is",ar/e t,e
bur$en o 3roo only by s,o5in/ t,at t,e ma;in/ o t,e 3rote"te$ $is"losure 3laye$
no 3art 5,atsoever in t,e relevant a"ts or omissions% t,at onus 5as 3lainly $is",ar/e$
,ere2
?(2 T,e se"on$ 3oint is t,at t,e 3ro3er test in t,is "onteDt is not 5,et,er t,e $e"ision 5as
materially *in t,e sense o more t,an trivially+ inluen"e$ by t,e 3ros"ribe$ reason
but% as in unair $ismissal "ases% it is 5,et,er t,e 3ros"ribe$ reason 5as t,e sole or
3rin"i3al reason or t,e a"tion ta;en2 4r &in$en submits t,at t,e EAT 5as 5ron/ to
$ra5 analo/ies bet5een t,e 5,istle blo5in/ le/islation an$ $omesti" le/islation
/ivin/ ee"t to EK la52 -n t,e latter "onteDt it is in"umbent on a "ourt to rea$ t,e
le/islation "om3atibly 5it, EK la5 an$ t,e 6no sense 5,atsoever7 test is a$o3te$ in
EK 'ire"tives2 :ut 5,ere t,ere is no su", reCuirement% t,e le/islation s,oul$ be
/iven its $omesti" meanin/ even i t,at means t,at t,e same statutory lan/ua/e may
be $ierently inter3rete$ $e3en$in/ u3on 5,et,er t,ere is an EK "onteDt or not: see
t,e observations o &or$ :ro5n o Eaton)un$er).ey5oo$ in R -$urst. v London
Northern /istrict Coroner [2009] 2 AC 1@9 3ara (2% KG.& 1?2 A""or$in/ly% t,e
EAT 5as 5ron/ to "onsi$er t,at it 5as obli/e$ to ollo5 t,e 3rin"i3les set out in 'gen
v Wong2
?02 4r &in$en submits t,at /iven t,at t,e test or t,e most eDtreme orm o vi"timisation%
namely $ismissal% is 5,et,er t,e 3ros"ribe$ reason 5as t,e sole or t,e 3rin"i3al
reason or t,e $ismissal% it 5oul$ be "urious i t,e em3loyer ,a$ to meet a stri"ter
stan$ar$ o 3roo 5,ere a $etriment s,ort o $ismissal 5as relie$ u3on2
?92 -n my <u$/ment% 4r &in$enJs irst submission is "orre"t2 T,e TribunalJs $e"ision
s,o5s t,at it 5as satisie$ t,at t,e reasons /iven by t,e Em3loyer or a"tin/ as it $i$
5ere /enuine an$ $emonstrate$ t,at t,e a"t t,at t,e "laimants ,a$ ma$e 3rote"te$
$is"losures $i$ not inluen"e t,ose $e"isions2 T,e Tribunal note$ in terms at t,e en$
o 3ara/ra3, ?9 o its $e"ision t,at 6t,ere must be a "ausal "onne"tion bet5een t,e
3rote"te$ a"t an$ t,e res3on$entJs a"ts or omissions to a"t27 -ts reasonin/ t,ereater
$emonstrates in my vie5 t,at it $i$ not t,in; t,ere 5as any su", "ausal "onne"tion2
T,e Tribunal eD3laine$ t,at it 5as satisie$ t,at alt,ou/, t,e Em3loyers 5ere o3en to
"riti"ism or not 3rote"tin/ t,e "laimants more ee"tively t,an t,ey $i$% t,eir ailure
to a"t more robustly 5as not a $eliberate omission an$ 5as not be"ause t,e 3rote"te$
$is"losures ,a$ been ma$e2
?@2 As to t,e 3ositive a"ts "om3laine$ o by t,e "laimants% t,e Tribunal a/ain oun$ t,at
t5o o t,e "laimants 5ere re$e3loye$ be"ause it a33eare$ to mana/ement to be t,e
only easible met,o$ o $ealin/ 5it, a $ysun"tional situation2 T,e EAT a/ree$ 5it,
t,e observations o t,e Em3loyment Tribunal to t,e ee"t t,at it is oten eDtremely
$ii"ult to resolve t,e "onli"ts 5,i", sometimes arise 5it,in t,e 5or;or"e ater a
3rote"te$ $is"losure ,as been ma$e2 T,e a"t t,at it 5as t,e "laimants% t,e vi"tims o
,arassment% 5,o 5ere re$e3loye$ 5as obviously not a 3oint lost on t,e Tribunal2 -t
5as evi$en"e rom 5,i", an ineren"e o vi"timisation "oul$ rea$ily be $ra5n2 :ut
t,e Tribunal 5as satisie$ t,at t,e Em3loyer ,a$ /enuinely a"te$ or ot,er reasons2
1n"e an em3loyer satisies t,e Tribunal t,at ,e ,as a"te$ or a 3arti"ular reason )
,ere% to reme$y a $ysun"tional situation ) t,at ne"essarily $is",ar/es t,e bur$en o
s,o5in/ t,at t,e 3ros"ribe$ reason 3laye$ no 3art in it2 -t is only i t,e Tribunal
"onsi$ers t,at t,e reason /iven is alse *5,et,er "ons"iously or un"ons"iously+ or t,at
t,e Tribunal is bein/ /iven somet,in/ less t,an t,e 5,ole story t,at it is le/itimate to
iner $is"rimination in a""or$an"e 5it, t,e 'gen 3rin"i3les2 .ere t,e Tribunal 5as
satisie$ t,at in re$e3loyin/ 4rs Fe"itt an$ 4rs Woo$"o"; t,e Em3loyer ,a$ a"te$ in
or$er to resolve t,e $ysun"tional situation2 - see no basis or /oin/ be,in$ t,at
in$in/ 5,i", is essentially one o a"t or t,e Em3loyment Tribunal2
?92 #imilarly 5it, 4rs .u/,es2 -t is true t,at t,ere 5as t,e a$$e$ eature ,ere t,at s,e
,a$ been $es"ribe$ as a trouble)ma;er 5,i", 5as "onsistent 5it, ,er "om3laint t,at
s,e 5as bein/ $enie$ t,e o33ortunity to 5or; s,its be"ause s,e 5as a 5,istleblo5er2
:ut t,e Tribunal eD3ressly reerre$ to t,is an$ "on"lu$e$ t,at "ontrary to 5,at t,at
evi$en"e mi/,t su//est% t,ere 5ere in a"t ot,er reasons 5,y 4rs &a;e too; t,e
a"tion s,e $i$2 T,e only 3ro3er rea$in/ o t,e $e"ision% in my vie5% is t,at t,e
Tribunal a""e3te$ t,at t,e 3rote"te$ $is"losure $i$ not 3lay a 3art in t,at $e"ision2
802 -t ollo5s t,at% in my <u$/ment% t,ere is not,in/ in t,e TribunalJs $e"ision 5,i", is
in"onsistent 5it, t,e a33roa", to t,e stan$ar$ o 3roo a$umbrate$ by t,e EAT2
#tri"tly% t,ereore% 4r &in$enJs se"on$ 3oint% ",allen/in/ t,e EATJs analysis o
"ausation% $oes not arise or $etermination an$ - 5ill $eal 5it, it briely2 #ui"e it to
say t,at - a/ree 5it, t,e submissions o 4s Romney% "ounsel or t,e "laimants% t,at
liability arises i t,e 3rote"te$ $is"losure is a material a"tor in t,e em3loyerJs
$e"ision to sub<e"t t,e "laimant to a $etrimental a"t2 - a/ree 5it, 4r &in$en t,at 'gen
is not stri"tly a33li"able sin"e it ,as an EK "onteDt2 .o5ever% t,e reasonin/ 5,i",
,as inorme$ t,e EK analysis is t,at unla5ul $is"riminatory "onsi$erations s,oul$
not be tolerate$ an$ ou/,t not to ,ave any inluen"e on an em3loyerJs $e"isions2 -n
my <u$/ment% t,at 3rin"i3le is eCually a33li"able 5,ere t,e ob<e"tive is to 3rote"t
5,istleblo5ers% 3arti"ularly /iven t,e 3ubli" interest in ensurin/ t,at t,ey are not
$is"oura/e$ rom "omin/ or5ar$ to ,i/,li/,t 3otential 5ron/$oin/2
812 - a""e3t% as 4r &in$en ar/ues% t,at t,is "reates an anomaly 5it, t,e situation in unair
$ismissal 5,ere t,e 3rote"te$ $is"losure must be t,e sole or 3rin"i3al reason beore
t,e $ismissal is $eeme$ to be automati"ally unair2 .o5ever% it seems to me t,at t,at
is sim3ly t,e result o 3la"in/ $ismissal or t,is 3arti"ular reason into t,e /eneral run
o unair $ismissal la52 As 4ummery &! "autione$ in "u0el v Roche 1roducts Ltd
[200@] -CR 999 at 3ara 8@% in t,e "onteDt o a 3rote"te$ $is"losure "laim:
6Knair $ismissal an$ $is"rimination on s3e"ii" 3ro,ibite$
/roun$s are% ,o5ever% $ierent "auses o a"tion2 T,e statutory
stru"ture o t,e unair $ismissal le/islation is so $ierent rom
t,at o t,e $is"rimination le/islation t,at an attem3t at "ross
ertilisation or le/al trans3lants runs t,e ris; o "om3li"atin/
rat,er t,an "lariyin/ t,e le/al "on"e3ts27
822 -n my <u$/ment% t,e better vie5 is t,at se"tion 89: 5ill be inrin/e$ i t,e 3rote"te$
$is"losure materially inluen"es *in t,e sense o bein/ more t,an a trivial inluen"e+
t,e em3loyerJs treatment o t,e 5,istleblo5er2 - >arliament ,a$ 5ante$ t,e test or
t,e stan$ar$ o 3roo in se"tion 89: to be t,e same as or unair $ismissal% it "oul$
,ave use$ 3re"isely t,e same lan/ua/e% but it $i$ not $o so2
T%o further grounds2
8?2 4s Romney an$ 4r Allen a$van"e$ t5o urt,er ar/uments 5,i", ,a$ not in a"t been
3ursue$ beore t,e EAT an$ 5,i",% i a""e3te$% 5oul$ ne"essarily involve a in$in/
t,at t,e Em3loyer 5as liable or a brea", o se"tion 89:2 :ot, "ounsel ur/e$ t,e
"ourt to a$o3t t,eir ar/uments to 3rovi$e a solution to 5,at t,ey $es"ribe$ as t,e
/ross in<usti"e o t,e inno"ent "laimant 5,istleblo5ers bein/ sub<e"te$ to a $etriment
5,en "ollea/ues 5,o ,a$ vi"timise$ t,em 5ere not2
882 4r Allen ,i/,li/,te$ "ertain eatures o t,is "ase 5,i", ,e sai$ 5ere% in t,e
eD3erien"e o t,e -nterveners% not un"ommon2 First% not5it,stan$in/ t,at t,e
"laimants ,a$ ma$e a <ustiie$ $is"losure% it 5as not treate$ as seriously as it s,oul$
,ave been2 #e"on$% t,e "laimants 5ere vi"timise$ by "ollea/ues2 T,ir$% t,at
vi"timisation 5as not a33ro3riately a$$resse$ by t,e em3loyers2 An$ inally% it 5as
t,e "laimants an$ not t,ose about 5,om t,e $is"losure 5as ma$e% nor in$ee$ t,ose
vi"timisin/ t,e "laimants% 5,o suere$ t,e $etriment2
8(2 T,e "ontention is t,at t,e la5 must ,ave been inten$e$ to 3rote"t 5,istleblo5ers in
t,ese "ir"umstan"es in or$er 3ro3erly to 3rote"t t,e 3ubli" interest2 #in"e t,e $e"ision
o t,e Tribunal un$amentally aile$ to $o t,at% its rulin/ must be la5e$2 -t "oul$ not
be "onsistent 5it, t,e le/islation to 3ermit t,e Em3loyer to a"t as it $i$ ,ere2
.o5ever% t,e "laimants an$ t,e -ntervener sou/,t to a",ieve t,at ob<e"tive by
$ierent routes2
802 4s Romney% "ounsel or t,e "laimants% a""e3ts t,at t,e Tribunal ,a$ to as; t,e reason
5,y t,e "laimants 5ere treate$ as t,ey 5ere% an$ t,at t,e im3osition o a $etriment is
only 6on t,e /roun$ o7 a 3rote"te$ $is"losure 5,ere t,at $is"losure is in a"t a
material reason motivatin/ t,e em3loyer2 .er submission is t,at t,e only 3ro3er
ineren"e on t,e a"ts o t,is "ase is t,at t,e treatment o t,ese "laimants 5as be"ause
o t,e 3rote"te$ $is"losure2 #,e a""e3ts t,at an em3loyer "an in a 3ro3er "ase ta;e
a"tion a/ainst a 5or;er 5,o ma;es a 3rote"te$ $is"losure in an una""e3table manner
*as in )artin v /evonshires +olicitors [2011] -CR ?(2+ or 5,o a"ts in an
una""e3table 5ay in relation to a 3rote"te$ $is"losure *as in #olton +chool v Evans
[2009] -CR 081 *CA++2 -n su", "ases it is le/itimate or a tribunal to in$ t,at
alt,ou/, t,e reason or t,e $ismissal 5as relate$ to t,e $is"losure% it 5as not in a"t
be"ause o t,e $is"losure itsel2 :ut t,is% s,e submits% is not su", a "ase2 -t is not
su//este$ t,at t,e "laimants $i$ anyt,in/ unto5ar$ or im3ro3er2 At all times t,ey
ma$e 3ro3er $is"losure in t,e 3ubli" interest an$ yet t,ey 5ere not 3rote"te$ by t,eir
em3loyers in t,e 5ay t,ey ou/,t to ,ave been2 -t 5oul$ be un<ust an$ "ontrary to t,e
3ur3oses o t,e A"t to $eny t,em t,e 3rote"tion o t,e la52
892 4s Romney submits t,at <usti"e is $one on"e it is re"o/nise$ t,at t,e $ysun"tional
situation an$ t,e ma;in/ o t,e 3rote"te$ $is"losures 5ere so ineDtri"ably inter)lin;e$
t,at it 5as not 3ossible or t,e em3loyer to ta;e a"tion to resolve t,e ormer 5it,out
ne"essarily en/a/in/ t,e latter2
8@2 - $isa/ree2 - entirely a""e3t t,at 5,ere t,e 5,istleblo5er is sub<e"t to a $etriment
5it,out bein/ at ault in any 5ay% tribunals 5ill nee$ to loo; 5it, a "riti"al ) in$ee$
s"e3ti"al ) eye to see 5,et,er t,e inno"ent eD3lanation /iven by t,e em3loyer or t,e
a$verse treatment is in$ee$ t,e /enuine eD3lanation2 T,e $etrimental treatment o an
inno"ent 5,istleblo5er ne"essarily 3rovi$es a stron/ prima facie "ase t,at t,e a"tion
,as been ta;en be"ause o t,e 3rote"te$ $is"losure an$ it "ries out or an eD3lanation
rom t,e em3loyer2
892 T,e "onseCuen"e o 4s RomneyJs submission% ,o5ever% is t,at t,ere "oul$ be no
eD3lanation 5,i", t,e em3loyer "oul$ oer in t,ese "ir"umstan"es 5,i", 5oul$
relieve ,im rom liability2 T,e nee$ to resolve a $ii"ult an$ $ysun"tional situation
"oul$ never 3rovi$e a la5ul eD3lanation or im3osin/ $etrimental treatment on an
inno"ent 5,istleblo5er2 - $o not t,in; t,at "an 3ossibly be ri/,t2 -t "annot be t,e "ase
t,at t,e em3loyer is ne"essarily obli/e$ to ensure t,at t,e 5,istleblo5ers are not
a$versely treate$ in su", a situation2 T,is 5oul$ mean t,at t,e reason 5,y t,e
em3loyer a"te$ as ,e $i$ must be $eeme$ to be t,e 3rote"te$ $is"losure even 5,ere
t,e Tribunal is 5,olly satisie$ on t,e a"ts t,at it 5as not2
(02 4oreover% it 5ill sometimes be an im3ossible ob<e"tive2 FreCuently t,ere 5ill be
"onten$in/ 3arties 5,o ea", "laim to be 5,istleblo5ers2 -n t,is "ase% or eDam3le% 4r
#5it 5oul$ be a 5,istleblo5er i ,e "om3laine$ t,at t,e a"ts o t,e "laimants 5ere
$ama/in/ ,is ,ealt,2 -n su", "ir"umstan"es i t,e 3arties "annot 5or; ,armoniously
t,e em3loyer 5ill ne"essarily ,ave to se3arate t,em an$ sub<e"t one o t,e
5,istleblo5ers to a $etriment2 -t "annot be assume$ t,at t,e irst to blo5 t,e 5,istle
ne"essarily $eserves t,e ullest 3rote"tion2
(12 T,ere 5ill also be "ases 5,ere it 5ill not be 3ra"ti"able to resolve t,e $is3ute by
removin/ rom t,e situation t,ose 5,o are unsym3at,eti" to t,e 5,istleblo5ers
be"ause o t,e 3otential $ama/e it 5ill "ause to business2 T,ey may be ;ey 3ersonnel
in t,e o3eration o t,e business2
(22 As bot, t,e Em3loyment Tribunal an$ t,e EAT a""e3te$% t,ese are eDtremely $ii"ult
"onli"ts or an em3loyer to resolve2 T,is em3loyer $ealt 5it, t,e situation
ina$eCuately as t,e Tribunal oun$% *an$ in$ee$ may 5ell ,ave been in brea", o t,e
"ontra"tual obli/ation o em3loyer an$ "oni$en"e o5e$ to t,ese "laimants by ailin/
to ta;e more a"tive ste3s to 3revent ,arassment by "ollea/ues+2 :ut t,e Cuestion ,ere
5as 5,et,er t,e Em3loyer ,a$ vi"timise$ t,ese 5,istleblo5ers 5it,in t,e meanin/ o
t,e statutory $einition2 T,e Tribunal "on"lu$e$ t,at it ,a$ not% an$ in $oin/ so it 5as
3lainly ully alert to t,e a"t t,at t,ese "laimants ,a$ been ,ars,ly treate$ by at least
some "ollea/ues2 - t,ereore re<e"t 4s RomneyJs submission on t,is 3oint2
(?2 4r Allen a$o3ts a more ra$i"al 3osition2 .is analysis is as ollo5s2 First% ,e submits
t,at t,e 3ur3ose be,in$ t,e 5,istle blo5in/ le/islation% as its title in$i"ates% is to
3rovi$e 3rote"tion *an$ ,e says ull 3rote"tion+ in t,e 3ubli" interest or
5,istleblo5ers2 T,at reCuires not only t,at 5,istleblo5ers s,oul$ be 3rote"te$ rom
bein/ 3enalise$ by t,e em3loyer or ,avin/ ma$e t,e $is"losure but also t,at t,ey
s,oul$ be 3rote"te$ rom a"ts o ,arassment "ommitte$ by ello5 5or;ers2 - t,at is
not $one it 5ill un$ermine t,e le/islation an$ $is"oura/e 5or;ers rom ma;in/
$is"losures 5,ere it is in t,e 3ubli" interest t,at t,ey s,oul$ $o so2 .e submits t,at
t,is "ase 3rovi$es an instru"tive eDam3le2 - t,ese "laimants ,a$ a33re"iate$ ,o5 t,ey
5oul$ be treate$ as a "onseCuen"e o ma;in/ t,eir $is"losures% t,ey 5oul$ never ,ave
been 5illin/ to s3ea; out2 T,e 3ubli" interest 5oul$ ,ave been un$ermine$2 .e
submits t,at in or$er to ensure t,at t,e 3ro3er ee"t is /iven to t,e le/islative
3ur3ose% 5or$s s,oul$ be a$$e$ to se"tion 89: so t,at it rea$s as ollo5s:
6 A 5or;er ,as t,e ri/,t not to be sub<e"te$ to any $etriment
by any a"t% or any $eliberate ailure to a"t% by ,is em3loyer
$one on t,e /roun$ t,at Lit un$ermines t,e 3rote"tion to
5,i", ,e or s,e is entitle$ by t,e le/islation an$ must ,ave i
t,e 3ubli" interest is to be se"ure$27
(82 A33lyin/ t,at 3rin"i3le to t,is "ase% ,e submits t,at t,e a"ts o t,e Em3loyer so
un$ermine$ t,e 3rote"tion to 5,i", t,e "laimants are entitle$ by t,e le/islation t,at
t,e a"ts must be treate$ as ,avin/ been on t,e /roun$ o t,e 3rote"te$ $is"losure2
((2 -n my <u$/ment% t,is /oes ar beyon$ t,e le/itimate role o t,e "ourt in "onstruin/
le/islation2 T,e 3ur3ose o a statute ,as to be /leane$ rom its lan/ua/e2 >arliament
,as 3lainly ",osen to 3rote"t 5,istleblo5ers rom t,e a"ts an$ $eliberate omissions o
t,e em3loyer2 - t,e reason or t,e a$verse treatment is t,e a"t t,at t,e em3loyee ,as
ma$e a 3rote"te$ $is"losure% t,at is unla5ul2 :ut it is stri;in/ t,at no obli/ation is
im3ose$ on ot,er 5or;ers not to ta;e a"tion a/ainst t,e 5,istleblo5er in t,ese
"ir"umstan"es% 3arti"ularly sin"e em3loyees are ma$e so liable 5it, res3e"t to t,e
$is"rimination le/islation2
(02 4r Allen is as;in/ t,e "ourt to reme$y t,e la"una ,e says eDists in t,e le/islation by
eDten$in/ t,e 3rimary liability o t,e em3loyer2 -n my <u$/ment% t,at involves /ivin/
a 5,olly $istorte$ meanin/ to t,e 5or$s 5,i", >arliament ,as em3loye$2 - ,ave no
$oubt t,at 5,en >arliament use$ t,e lan/ua/e 6$one on t,e /roun$ t,at7 it 5as
inten$in/ t,at t,is 5oul$ involve t,e "onsi$eration o t,e reason 5,y t,e em3loyer
,as ta;en t,e a"tion 5,i", ,e ,as2 4r AllenJs analysis /ives t,ose 5or$s no meanin/2
T,e em3loyer 5ill be liable to t,e em3loyee even 5,ere ,e ,as a"te$ or reasons
5,olly un"onne"te$ 5it, t,e 3rote"te$ $is"losure i in a"t% loo;in/ at t,e matter
ob<e"tively% t,e 5or;er 5oul$ be ina$eCuately 3rote"te$ 5it,out im3osin/ liability2
T,e 5or$s 5,i", 4r Allen 5oul$ rea$ into t,e le/islation are not t,ere by ne"essary
im3li"ation2 T,ey involve a 5,olesale re)5ritin/ o t,e statute2 .is 3remise% namely
t,at >arliament must ,ave inten$e$ to 3rote"t 5or;ers rom t,e a$verse ee"ts o a"ts
o vi"timisation by ello5 5or;ers% is not in my vie5 sustainable /iven t,e lan/ua/e
t,at >arliament ,as use$2 Nor $oes t,e lon/ title ,el3 sin"e it merely says t,at t,e A"t
is to 3rote"t 5,istleblo5ersB it /ives no in$i"ation as to ,o5 ull t,at 3rote"tion is
inten$e$ to be2
(92 Furt,ermore% as 4r &in$en 3ointe$ out in ar/ument% 5,ere t,e a$verse a"t is
$ismissal itsel t,en t,ere is only 3rote"tion 5,ere t,e 3ros"ribe$ reason is t,e reason
or at least t,e 3rin"i3al reason or t,e $ismissal2 T,at alls s,ort o aor$in/ t,e ull
an$ ee"tive 3rote"tion to t,e 5,istleblo5er 5,i", 4r Allen submits 5e s,oul$
assume 5as inten$e$2
(@2 -n my <u$/ment% t,ere is not,in/ sur3risin/ in >arliament "onsi$erin/ t,at t,e
3rin"i3al 3rote"tion 5,i", nee$s to be aor$e$ to 5,istleblo5ers is rom retribution
by t,e em3loyer2 -t may be t,at t,e 3arti"ular interest /rou3s 5it, an interest in t,is
le/islation "oul$ a/ree 3rote"tion to t,at eDtent but no urt,er2 T,is is o "ourse mere
s3e"ulation but in my vie5 it s,o5s 5,y it 5oul$ be ina33ro3riate to assume t,at
>arliament inten$e$ a uller 3rote"tion t,an naturally arises on t,e 5or$s o t,e
statute2 - t,ereore re<e"t t,e submission t,at t,e Em3loyment Tribunal erre$ in
ailin/ to /ive t,is "onstru"tion to se"tion 89:2 - re"o/nise 5,y t,e "laimants eel
a//rieve$2 - a""e3t too t,at 4r Allen may be ri/,t to say t,at i t,e Tribunal $e"ision
is allo5e$ to stan$% it means t,at on one vie5 o t,e matter 5,istleblo5ers are
ina$eCuately 3rote"te$2 - so% or reasons - ,ave /iven% any reme$y must lie 5it,
>arliament2
(92 - 5oul$ ma;e one inal observation about t,e TribunalJs reasons2 T,ere is no reasons
",allen/e as su",% an$ it 5oul$ ,ave been too late to raise it or t,e irst time beore
t,is Court2 -n any event% - $oubt 5,et,er any su", ",allen/e 5oul$ ,ave su""ee$e$
sin"e t,e essential reasonin/ o t,e Tribunal is "lear2 - a33lau$ t,e 5ay in 5,i", t,e
Tribunal en"a3sulate$ t,e essential in$in/s in its $e"ision2 T,ere is no nee$ or a
blo5 by blo5 re,earsal o t,e evi$en"e% an$ in$ee$ su", an a33roa", oten obus"ates
t,e issues rat,er t,an assistin/ t,e Tribunal to rea", its "on"lusion2 -n a$$ition% a
Tribunal is entitle$ ) an$ in$ee$ s,oul$ be en"oura/e$ ) to eD3lain its le/al
"on"lusions "ris3ly an$ su""in"tly as t,is Tribunal $i$2 :ut it 5oul$ ,ave assiste$ t,e
a33ellate "ourtJs un$erstan$in/ o t,e issues% an$ 5oul$ ,ave $emonstrate$ to t,e
"laimants t,at t,eir sense o /rievan"e ,a$ been ully a33re"iate$% i a little more ,a$
been sai$ about t5o eatures o t,e "ase2 T,e irst is t,e nature an$ eDtent o t,e
a$verse treatment 5,i", t,e Tribunal oun$ ,a$ been mete$ out to t,ese "laimants by
t,eir 5or; "ollea/uesB an$ t,e se"on$ is 5,y t,e Em3loyer ,a$ "on"lu$e$ t,at t,e
only easible 5ay o resolvin/ t,e $ysun"tional situation 5as to transer 4rs
Woo$"o"; an$ 4rs Fe"itt rat,er t,an ot,ers2 #o ar as t,e latter as3e"t is "on"erne$% -
re"o/nise t,at t,e issue is not 5,et,er t,at reason 5as a /oo$ reason but 5,et,er it
5as /enuine% an$ t,e Tribunal "on"lu$e$ t,at it 5as2 Nevert,eless% it 5oul$ ,ave
been more satisa"tory rom t,e 3oint o vie5 o bot, t,e "laimants an$ t,e a33ellate
"ourts% i t,at as3e"t o t,e reasonin/ ,a$ been les,e$ out2
/isposal.
002 For reasons set out in t,is <u$/ment - 5oul$ u3,ol$ t,e a33eal an$ restore t,e in$in/
o t,e Em3loyment Tribunal t,at t,ere 5as no brea", o se"tion 89: o t,e
Em3loyment Ri/,ts A"t in t,is "ase2
Lor% J8t(7e D#5(/
012 - a/ree t,at t,is a33eal s,oul$ be allo5e$ or t,e reasons /iven by Elias &!2
022 - ,a$ an amount o sym3at,y or t,e "laimants% /iven 5,at ,as ,a33ene$ to t,em2 4s
Romney 3resente$ t,eir "ase very or"eully2 :ut s,e *ri/,tly+ a""e3te$ t,at t,e test to
be a33lie$ un$er #e"tion 89: 5as not sim3ly an ob<e"tive 6but or7 test: t,ere 5as
reCuire$ an enCuiry into t,e reasons 5,y t,e Em3loyer a"te$ as it $i$2 T,e Tribunal
,ere "orre"tly $ire"te$ itsel as to t,e a33roa", reCuire$B an$ its a"tual in$in/s
"annot be sai$ to be ones 5,i", 5ere 3erverse or not 3ro3erly o3en to it2
Lor% J8t(7e M866er"/
0?2 - also a/ree2