Aspinall v. MSI Mech Forge Ltd [2001] UKEAT 0891_01_1511 (15 November 2001)

Aspinall v. MSI Mech Forge Ltd [2001] UKEAT 0891_01_1511 (15 November 2001)

There is an arguable case that the Appellant may have been subjected to a detriment for making a protected disclosure and that the Tribunal may have erred in its analysis, thus the appeal should proceed.

Citation
[2001] UKEAT 0891_01_1511
Parties
Appellant: Appellant; Respondent: Employment Tribunal
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
15 November 2001
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing
Outcome
Permission to proceed with appeal granted
Legal Topics
Protected Disclosure, Detriment, Perversity, Confidentiality Clause
Employment Law Protected Disclosure Detriment Perversity Confidentiality Clause

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Appellant

Appellant

Employment Tribunal

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Appellant made a protected disclosure under the Employment Rights Act 1996 as amended by the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998
  2. 2 Whether the Appellant was subjected to a detriment as a result of making a protected disclosure
  3. 3 Whether the Employment Tribunal's findings were perverse

Ratio Decidendi

There is an arguable case that the Appellant may have been subjected to a detriment for making a protected disclosure and that the Tribunal may have erred in its analysis, thus the appeal should proceed.

Court Disposition

Permission to proceed with appeal granted

Orders

  • Case to proceed to full hearing in listing category B with a two hour estimate and usual directions as to skeleton arguments