The Office for Gas and Electricity Markets v Pytel (VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION - Whistleblowing) [2018] UKEAT 0044_17_1012 (10 December 2018)

The Office for Gas and Electricity Markets v Pytel (VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION - Whistleblowing) [2018] UKEAT 0044_17_1012 (10 December 2018)

It is not possible to interpret section 105 of the Utilities Act 2000 compatibly with the claimant's Convention Rights under section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998. The Employment Tribunal erred in law by reading down section 105 to permit disclosure in whistleblowing proceedings, as such an interpretation would contradict the express statutory scheme and Parliament's intention. Only Parliament or the Secretary of State can amend the scope of section 105, and the Employment Appeal Tribunal substitutes its decision for that of the Employment Tribunal.

Citation
[2018] UKEAT 0044_17_1012
Parties
Appellant Advocate: Miss Diya Sen Gupta; Respondent Advocate: Mr Paul Mitchell; Respondent Advocate: Ms Sheryn Omeri
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
10 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal Tribunal / Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Employment Tribunal's decision set aside and substituted.
Legal Topics
Whistleblowing, Victimisation Discrimination, Disclosure of Information, Compatibility With Convention Rights, Interpretation of Statutes
Employment Law Human Rights Law Statutory Interpretation Whistleblowing Victimisation Discrimination Disclosure of Information Compatibility With Convention Rights Interpretation of Statutes

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Miss Diya Sen Gupta

Appellant Advocate

Mr Paul Mitchell

Respondent Advocate

Ms Sheryn Omeri

Respondent Advocate

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal Tribunal / Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 105 of the Utilities Act 2000 can be interpreted compatibly with Convention Rights under section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998
  2. 2 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in law by reading down section 105 to permit disclosure in whistleblowing proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

It is not possible to interpret section 105 of the Utilities Act 2000 compatibly with the claimant's Convention Rights under section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998. The Employment Tribunal erred in law by reading down section 105 to permit disclosure in whistleblowing proceedings, as such an interpretation would contradict the express statutory scheme and Parliament's intention. Only Parliament or the Secretary of State can amend the scope of section 105, and the Employment Appeal Tribunal substitutes its decision for that of the Employment Tribunal.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Employment Tribunal's decision set aside and substituted.

Orders

  • It is not possible to read section 105 of the Utilities Act 2000 compatibly with Convention Rights; disclosure in whistleblowing proceedings is prohibited unless and until Parliament or the Secretary of State amends section 105.