Causation in whistleblowing
In Anastasiou v Western Union Payment Services, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) determined whether the person who subjected the claimant to a detriment has to have knowledge of the protected act for a whistleblowing claim to succeed.
By law, in order to have a successful whistleblowing claim, an employee must first demonstrate that he or she made a qualified protected disclosure. In order for the disclosure to qualify as a protected disclosure, there are a number of qualifying factors. For example, it must involve the disclosure of factual ‘information’ to an employer. Merely gathering evidence or threatening to make a disclosure is not sufficient; in addition, this disclosure of information must be more than the employee simply expressing a personal opinion. Once a qualified protected disclosure has been established, the employee must then show that the protected disclosure was the reason for the detriment or dismissal. The difficulty in proving this second part of this test (i.e. the element of causation) is often the reason that whistleblowing claims fail…
Click on the link below to read the rest of the Winckworth Sherwood briefing.
Sign in or Register to continue reading this article
It's quick, easy and free!
It takes just 5 minutes to register. Answer a few simple questions and once completed you’ll have instant access.Register now
Why register to The Lawyer
In-depth, expert analysis into the stories behind the headlines from our leading team of journalists.
Identify the major players and business opportunities within a particular region through our series of free, special reports.
Receive your pick of The Lawyer's daily and weekly email newsletters, tailored by practice area, region and job function.
More relevant to you
To continue providing the best analysis, insight and news across the legal market we are collecting some information about who you are, what you do and where you work to improve The Lawyer and make it more relevant to you.