In his latest article, Beach Hut Specialist Richard Ramshaw discusses how much a beach hut is likely to set you back, why some are so expensive and the process involved in buying.
Beatt v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust
The Court of Appeal has held that where the making of a disclosure is the principal reason for a dismissal, the decision-taker's belief about whether the disclosure is protected is not relevant.
The Claimant, a cardiologist, was involved in an invasive procedure that led to a patient's death. During the course of the operation, his most trusted nurse, Sister Jones, was suspended. So far as the Claimant was concerned, the timing of the suspension was irresponsible and the nurse's absence from theatre contributed to the patient's death. The Claimant made various disclosures related to this incident and his belief the actions compromised patient safety resulting from what he considered to be a lack of sufficient specialist staff.
The hospital decided the allegations were gratuitous, without merit, and motivated both by the Claimant's antagonism to the department's assistant director and his wishes for Sister Jones's reinstatement. Disciplinary proceedings were brought against the Claimant and he was dismissed. The employment tribunal found the principal reason for the Claimant's dismissal was the making of protected disclosures.
In Practice
Whilst there were a number of grounds of appeal, the principal point of interest concerned the hospital's belief that the Claimant's disclosures (for which he was dismissed) were not protected because they were made in bad faith or were not in the public interest (as per whichever of the two statutory tests was in force at the date of each disclosure). The Court of Appeal considered this irrelevant. The question is an objective one to be determined by the employment tribunal. To hold otherwise would in many cases deprive employees of the legislation’s intended protection.
Thus given the employment tribunal found objectively that the disclosures were protected, and that the principal reason for the dismissal was making those disclosures, the Court of Appeal upheld the employment tribunal's finding of automatic unfair dismissal.
At Frettens, all of our solicitors offer a free initial meeting or chat on the phone to answer your questions. If this article raises issues for you or your business, please call us on 01202 499255 and Paul or Kate will be happy to discuss it with you.
