In Ajaz v Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, the Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that an employment judge erred in concluding that rule 52 of the Tribunal Rules 2013 prevented the claimant from raising new whistleblowing detriment claims after earlier detriment claims that were based on the same protected disclosures were dismissed following withdrawal
In Ajaz v Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, the Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that an employment judge erred in concluding that rule 52 of the Tribunal Rules 2013 prevented the claimant from raising new whistleblowing detriment claims after earlier detriment claims that were based on the same protected disclosures were dismissed following withdrawal
Directors and senior managers and their employers should consider the recent Court of Appeal decision in the Osipov whistleblowing case very carefully. Briefly, by way of scene-setting, Osipov had made a series of protected disclosures and he was ultimately dismissed as CEO of the employer company pursuant to a decision of two non-executive directors (NEDS)