Stefan Brochwicz-Lewinski has successfully defended an appeal in the Employment Appeal Tribunal in a whistleblowing case brought by a financial compliance officer who was dismissed after making a protected disclosure.
In Parsons v Airplus International Ltd (http://bit.ly/2iZ0RRn), it was held that Ms Parsons’ conduct at work and how she went about her job could properly be separated from the fact of any protected disclosure made, and therefore be relied upon in dismissing her.
As was submitted on the Employer’s behalf, the principle of separability was of particular importance in a case involving someone in a compliance role where, on one view, almost everything she raised would be related to matters that could amount to protected disclosures.
Proper management scrutiny and control would, otherwise, be impeded if not completely prevented. It was also held that, in circumstances in which a disclosure is made purely out of self-interest, that does not satisfy the new public interest requirement in s43B Employment Rights Act 1996, and therefore that disclosure would not qualify for protection.