Chesterton Global Ltd & Anor v Nurmohamed & Anor (Rev 1) [2017]

The claimant brought a whistleblowing claim after the respondent changed the method by which it paid commission to its employees from a system based on revenue to one calculated on profits. He argued that 100 other managers were also affected and that the complaint was in the ‘public interest’ based on the number of people affected. The tribunal accepted that a group of 100 people was sufficient to meet the definition of ‘the public’ and this could mean a section of the public rather than the general public.

The question for the Court of Appeal was whether a disclosure in the private interests of the whistleblower could be considered of public interest merely because it also served the