Court ruling offers further protection to whistle
Jinfo Blog
3rd May 2007
Item
Employees who feel impelled to report on malpractice in corporations or public bodies, but are worried about possible dismissal as a result, appear to have received further protection from a ruling by the Court of Appeal in London. In the case of Babula v Waltham Forest College (http://www.lawreports.co.uk/WLRD/2007/CACIV/mar0.3.htm), Lord Justice Ward ruled that, where an employee made a claim for unfair dismissal as a result of having made a whistleblowing âprotected disclosureâ under the Employment Rights Act 1996, it was sufficient that he âreasonably believed the matters that he relied on amounted to a criminal offence, or founded a legal obligationâ. The employee did not have to be able to point to an actual criminal offence or to an actual legal obligation in order to claim protection under the law. The Financial Times reported (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/27662d64-d10a-11db-836a-000b5df10621.html) that this should encourage more whistleblowers to come forward because up to now there was an alternative argument that, in order for a whistleblowing employee to be legally protected, an actual offence would need to have occurred or be about to do so. That argument was thrown out by Lord Justice Wall, with the support of his two fellow Appeal Court judges. âThe purpose of the statute⦠is to encourage responsible whistleblowing,â he said.About this article
- Blog post title: Court ruling offers further protection to whistle
- Link to this page
- View printable version
What's new at Jinfo?
Vendor adoption of AI
Community session
23rd May 2024
Mainstream GenAI, emerging vendors and your offshore resourcing strategy
Blog posting
9th May 2024
May 2024 Update
YouTube video
9th May 2024
- Jinfo Community session (TBC) (Community) 16th July 2024
- Jinfo Community session (TBC) (Community) 18th June 2024
- Vendor adoption of AI (Community) 23rd May 2024
Learn more about the Jinfo Subscription