Under S43B of the Employment Rights Act 1996, a whistleblowing disclosure is protected if it is “information which, in the reasonable belief of the worker …tends to show” one or more of the six, listed, serious acts of malpractice. In Kilraine v London Borough of Wandsworth, the Court of Appeal held that ETs should not put a gloss on the statutory language by trying to distinguish whether the worker’s statement is ‘information’ or just an ‘allegation’ in deciding whether protection applies. The test is whether it is “information”…”which tends to show” malpractice. The Court confirmed that the disclosure should be assessed in the light of the particular context in which it is made and has to have a sufficient factual content and specificity so that it is capable of tending to show malpractice. In this case, K’s statement that there had been numerous incidents of inappropriate behaviour towards her did not qualify for protection as it did not identify any relevant context which might explain its meaning, nor did it supply the relevant minimum factual content.

This update provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and help judgments made in every aspect of the case. Click on the links to access full details. If no link is provided, contact us for more information.  Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, SM&B cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.