Brooks v Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust Posted In: Case Law
Legal BodyEmployment Appeal Tribunal (UKEAT)
Type of Claim / JurisdictionWhistleblowing (Protected Disclosures)
The claimant is a consultant plastic surgeon employed by the respondent trust. Between April 2011 and October 2014, he raised concerns regarding staffing levels and the consequences it could have for the health and safety of patients.
At the Tribunal, the claimant claimed to have made 18 protected disclosures which led to 40 alleged detriments. At the end of a 27 day hearing in front of the Tribunal, the claims were dismissed. The Tribunal found that there had been some protected disclosures and detriment but that the two were not related. The Tribunal noted that the claimant’s evidence was such that it tried to demonstrate that there was some conspiracy against
Already a subscriber?
Click here to login and access the full article.Log in now to read the full article
Don't miss out, start your free trial today!
Are you fully aware of the benefits of Legal-Island's Employment Law Update Service? We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact on your business.
Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
Ensure your organisation’s policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team at Worthingtons Solicitors
The information in this article is provided as part of Legal-Island's Employment Law Hub. We regret we are not able to respond to requests for specific legal or HR queries and recommend that professional advice is obtained before relying on information supplied anywhere within this article.