Case Comment: Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti [2019] UKSC 55, Part One – UKSC Blog

‘If an employee is dismissed on bogus grounds invented by someone more senior than her in the business, that person’s true reason for acting as they did will be the real reason for the dismissal, even if the decision to dismiss was made by another person acting in good faith in reliance on the bogus grounds.’

Full Story

UKSC Blog, 17th February 2020

Source: ukscblog.com

COA Considers Causation & the Reach of s.43G in Jesudason v Alder Hey Childrens NHS Foundation Trust – Old Square Chambers

Posted February 11th, 2020 in causation, disclosure, news, victimisation, whistleblowers by sally

‘Mr Jesudason was a consultant paediatric surgeon for the Trust. Between 2009 and 2014, he made a number of allegations to the Trust, several regulatory bodies and other third parties, including the media. These allegations related to serious failures and wrongdoing in the operation of his Department at the Trust. Following the termination of his employment, Mr Jesudason brought claims of whistleblowing. His claims were dismissed by the ET and the EAT. Giving the sole judgment in the Court of Appeal, Sir Patrick Elias dismissed Mr Jesudason’s appeal.’

Full Story

Old Square Chambers, 4th February 2020

Source: www.oldsquare.co.uk

Acas guidance warns against routine use of non-disclosure agreements – Local Government Lawyer

‘Non-disclosure agreements should not be used routinely or to prevent someone from reporting sexual harassment, discrimination or whistleblowing at work, Acas has said in new guidance.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 10th February 2020

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

NDAs ‘should not silence sexual harassment claims’ – BBC News

‘Non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) should not be used to prevent someone from reporting sexual harassment in the workplace, according to new guidance.’

Full Story

BBC News, 10th February 2020

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

West Suffolk Hospital staff ‘feared raising concerns’, says CQC – BBC News

Posted January 30th, 2020 in hospitals, news, reports, whistleblowers by tracey

‘Staff at a hospital accused of conducting a “witch hunt” to identify a whistleblower felt a lack of “freedom to speak up”, a report has said.’

Full Story

BBC News, 30th January 2020

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

Congolese torture survivor gets Home Office reprieve – The Guardian

Posted January 15th, 2020 in asylum, deportation, government departments, immigration, news, torture, whistleblowers by sally

‘A torture survivor from Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) is celebrating after a Home Office U-turn allowed him to stay in the UK.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 15th January 2020

Source: www.theguardian.com

Employment and Discrimination Newsletter – January 2020 – 3PB

‘Craig Ludlow edits 3PB’s latest Employment & Discrimination newsletter, including contributions from Andrew MacPhail and Daniel Brown.’

Full Story

3PB, 6th January 2020

Source: www.3pb.co.uk

Doctors at West Suffolk hospital ‘too scared’ to report safety issues – The Guardian

Posted December 12th, 2019 in bullying, disciplinary procedures, doctors, hospitals, news, whistleblowers by tracey

‘Doctors at a hospital accused of bullying its staff have told the NHS care regulator that they are too scared to report lapses in patient safety in case they end up facing disciplinary action.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 11th December 2019

Source: www.theguardian.com

s.103A and concealed reasons; Royal Mail v. Jhuti [2019] UKSC 55 – Parklane Plowden Chambers

‘The Supreme Court has confirmed that a Tribunal may find that the reason for the dismissal is something other than that given to the employee by the decision-maker – even where that reason is genuinely held by the decision maker; Royal Mail Group Ltd v. Jhuti [2019] UKSC 55 (“Jhuti”).’

Full Story

Parklane Plowden, 9th December 2019

Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk

Automatic Unfair Dismissal: Can the reason for the dismissal be other than that given to the employee by the decision-maker? – Pallant Chambers

‘The question for the Supreme Court in Royal Mail Group Limited v Jhuti [2019] UKSC 55 was whether in a claim for unfair dismissal can the reason for the dismissal be other than that given to the employee by the decision-maker?’

Full Story

Pallant Chambers, 5th December 2019

Source: www.pallantchambers.co.uk

The Reason Behind the Reason Behind the Decision to Dismiss – Littleton Chambers

‘The Supreme Court has allowed the appeal in Royal Mail Group Ltd -v- Jhuti [2019] UKSC 55 and has held unanimously that when deciding what was the reason for dismissal in unfair dismissal, it may not be enough simply to consider what was subjectively in the mind of the decision-maker. In a unanimous decision delivered by Lord Wilson (Lady Hale (President), Lord Carnwath, Lord Hodge and Lady Arden concurring) the Supreme Court has held that where the real reason is hidden from the decision-maker behind an invented reason, the court must penetrate through the invention and decide upon the basis of the real reason [paragraphs 60-62 of the Judgment]. ‘

Full Story

Littleton Chambers, 27th November 2019

Source: www.littletonchambers.com

New Judgment: Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti [2019] UKSC 55 – UKSC Blog

‘The appeal concerned the dismissal of Ms Jhuti from her employment by Royal Mail Group Ltd. The key question of law that it raised was whether in a claim for unfair dismissal under Part X of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the reason for the dismissal can be other than that given to the employee by the employer’s appointed decision-maker.’

Full Story

UKSC Blog, 27th November 2019

Source: ukscblog.com

Secretary “humiliated” by comments on 50th birthday loses claim against law firm – Legal Futures

‘A legal secretary who claimed she felt humiliated and insulted by a colleague commenting on her 50th birthday has lost her claim for harassment and age discrimination against the law firm.’

Full Story

Legal Futures, 8th November 2019

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

From contract to role: using human rights to widen the personal scope of employment protections – Oxford Human Rights Hub

‘The UK Supreme Court’s judgment in Gilham demonstrates how human rights can be used to widen the class of individuals who benefit from employment rights (the “personal scope” of the rights). Further, the court’s reasoning evidences a shift away from contractual thinking in labour law.’

Full Story

Oxford Human Rights Hub, 1st November 2019

Source: ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk

Gilham: breaking down the limitations on whistleblowing protection – where next? – Littleton Chambers

‘Whistleblowing protection continues to expand and develop. Even without reliance on Art.10 ECHR the Courts have not been shy of adopting what might at first appear to be a strained construction of the legislation to further the underlying policy objectives. Now the Supreme Court’s decision in Gilham v Ministry of Justice [2019] UKSC 44 has demonstrated the strength of the interpretative obligation to construe the legislation in accordance with Article 10 (or that article read with A.14 ECHR). Indeed this points to the possibility of extending the scope of protection much further. Litigation over the position of secondees, applicants, volunteers and others, as well as in relation to detriment inflicted because of a perception (justified or not) that a worker has or may be about to make a disclosure, or was associated in some way with someone else’s disclosures, can be expected. These cases will need to explore the scope of the State’s positive obligation to protect freedom of expression. They will no doubt face arguments that the necessary reading down is against the grain, or contrary to fundamental features, of the statutory provisions.’

Full Story

Littleton Chambers, 17th October 2019

Source: www.littletonchambers.com

Gilham v Ministry of Justice [2019] UKSC 44 – Old Square Chambers

‘In Gilham v MOJ the Supreme Court considered the novel question whether judges are workers for the purposes of the protection against whistle blowing detriment in the Employment Rights Act 1996.’

Full Story

Old Square Chambers, 16th October 2019

Source: www.oldsquare.co.uk

Gilham v Ministry of Justice: A New Chapter in Employment Protection? – Cloisters

‘The Supreme Court has delivered its decision in the landmark case of Gilham v Ministry of Justice. In conferring the right to pursue whistleblowing complaints on judges – and for that matter all office-holders – it has opened a new frontier for the role of the European Convention of Human Rights in employment disputes.’

Full Story

Cloisters, 16th October 2019

Source: www.cloisters.com

Whistleblowing judges: protected by human rights? – UK Human Rights Blog

‘The UK Supreme Court has unanimously granted an appeal by a district judge against the Court of Appeal’s decision that she did not qualify as a “worker” under the Employment Rights Act 1996 (the “1996 Act”), and therefore could not benefit from the whistleblowing protections it conferred.’

Full Story

UK Human Rights Blog, 18th October 2019

Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com

Equalities watchdog ‘calls time’ on discrimination gagging orders – Daily Telegraph

‘Non-disclosure agreements must not prevent employees bringing discrimination cases against their employer, new guidance from the equalities watchdog says.’

Full Story

Daily Telegraph, 17th October 2019

Source: www.telegraph.co.uk

Aid agencies accused of failure to make good on Oxfam abuse scandal pledges – The Guardian

Posted October 18th, 2019 in charities, news, sexual offences, whistleblowers by tracey

‘MPs have accused aid organisations of “dragging their feet” over combating sexual exploitation and abuse in the sector, despite safeguarding pledges made in 2018 after the Oxfam abuse scandal. Work to improve protection and support for whistleblowers has “stalled”, and more needs to be done to protect survivors, a report by the UK international development committee (IDC) has said.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 18th October 2019

Source: www.theguardian.com