With the recent bad weather in the UK, Norbrook Laboratories (GB) LTD v Shaw is a timely reminder of the type information which can amount to a qualifying disclosure protected by the whistleblowing provisions in the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996) where health and safety is concerned. On the facts of this case the EAT agreed with an employment judge (EJ), as a preliminary point in an alleged whistleblowing dismissal claim, that three emails from Shaw to his employer, when taken together, could amount to a qualifying disclosure within the meaning of S.43B(1) ERA 1996, even though they were not sent to the same individual or department and taken separately each email was not such a disclosure.
The emails contained information about the dangerous driving conditions for Shaw’s team during the severe winter of 2010, when large snowfalls meant the roads were covered with snow and the main motorways were closed. Shaw was making the point that the conditions were so bad that his team’s safety was in danger as a result of driving in the snowy conditions and the EAT took the same view as the EJ that the general information Shaw provided, drawing this dangerous state of affairs to his employer’s attention, was enough to amount to a qualifying disclosure under S.43B (1)(e) ERA 1996, i.e. information which, in the reasonable belief of the worker, tends to show that the health or safety of any individual has been, is being or is likely to be, endangered.
Content Note
The aim is to provide summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. In particular, where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out full details of all the facts, the legal arguments presented by the parties and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Click on the links provided to access full details. If no link is provided contact us for further 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.
This 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 the judgments made in every aspect of the case. 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, we 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.
