Arthur v Hertfordshire Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust (PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE Striking-out : dismissal) [2019] UKEAT 0121_19_1308 (13 August 2019)

Arthur v Hertfordshire Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust (PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE Striking-out : dismissal) [2019] UKEAT 0121_19_1308 (13 August 2019)

The Employment Tribunal erred in law by holding there was no qualifying disclosure when the information was already known to the recipient and by applying too low a threshold in striking out the claims. However, the Tribunal's decision to impose deposit orders was a permissible exercise of discretion, as the claims had little reasonable prospect of success.

Citation
[2019] UKEAT 0121_19_1308
Parties
Appellant: Claimant; Respondent: Respondent
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
13 August 2019
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal Against Employment Tribunal's Strike Out and Deposit Order Decisions
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; strike out set aside; deposit orders upheld
Legal Topics
Protected Disclosure, Whistleblowing, Unfair Dismissal, Detriment, Strike Out, Deposit Order, Burden of Proof
Employment Law Protected Disclosure Whistleblowing Unfair Dismissal Detriment Strike Out Deposit Order Burden of Proof

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Claimant

Appellant

Respondent

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal Against Employment Tribunal's Strike Out and Deposit Order Decisions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in striking out the claimant's protected disclosure detriment and dismissal claims for having no reasonable prospect of success
  2. 2 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in law regarding the definition of qualifying disclosure when information was already known to the recipient
  3. 3 Whether the Employment Tribunal applied the correct threshold for strike out and deposit orders

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal erred in law by holding there was no qualifying disclosure when the information was already known to the recipient and by applying too low a threshold in striking out the claims. However, the Tribunal's decision to impose deposit orders was a permissible exercise of discretion, as the claims had little reasonable prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; strike out set aside; deposit orders upheld

Orders

  • Strike out of claimant's claims set aside
  • Deposit orders of £250 for detriment and £250 for dismissal to be drawn up by the Employment Tribunal in substitution for strike out