An employee who is dismissed shall be regarded for the purposes of this Part as unfairly dismissed if the reason (or, if more than one, the principal reason) for the dismissal is that the employee made a protected disclosure.F681]
Definitions used in section 103A 2
- employee
(1) In this Act “employee” means an individual who has entered into or works under (or, where the employment has ceased, worked under) a contract of employment.
Defined in s.230(1) · see it in the full Act- protected disclosure
“protected disclosure” has the meaning given by section 43A,
Defined in s.235(1) · see it in the full ActIn this Act a “protected disclosure” means a qualifying disclosure (as defined by section 43B) which is made by a worker in accordance with any of sections 43C to 43H.
Defined in s.43A · see it in the full Act
Cases considering section 103A 180
Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti
The court interpreted the reason for dismissal as the hidden reason where a superior manager decides upon dismissal for protected disclosures, fabricates another reason and causes an innocent decision-maker to adopt it. Such a dismissal is automatically unfair (see paras [46]; [60]–[62]).
Clifford Stewart Lay & Anor v Independent Vetcare Limited
The court applied the provision as the basis of the alleged automatically unfair dismissal. For interim relief, Mr Lay had to show that he was likely to establish that protected disclosures were the reason or principal reason for dismissal. (see paras [4]; [65]-[68])
Ian Rice v Wicked Vision Limited
The court treated section 103A as the Part X route for an automatically unfair dismissal claim based on a protected disclosure and as the relevant alternative to a dismissal-based section 47B claim. (see paras [29]-[30]; [87]-[93])
- Ling Kong v Gulf International Bank (UK) Limited
- Simpson v Cantor Fitzgerald Europe
- Timis & Anor v Osipov & Anor
- The British Council v Jeffery & Ors
- Royal Mail Ltd v Jhuti
- Beatt v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust
- Co-Operative Group Ltd v Baddeley
- NHS Manchester v Fecitt & Ors
- Dandpat v The University of Bath & Ors
- Kuzel v Roche Products Ltd
- Lake v British Transport Police
- Babula v Waltham Forest College
- Bolton School v Evans
- Bolton School v Evans
- Cavendish v Greater Manchester (South) Ltd (t/a Stagecoach Manchester)
- Pinnington v Swansea City & County & Anor
- Street v Derbyshire Unemployed Workers' Centre
160 more judgments, and what each says about section 103A, are in the case-law panel in the full Act.
Amendments and notes
1 notes from legislation.gov.uk
Amendments
- F681S. 103A inserted (2.7.1999) by 1998 c. 23, s. 5; S.I. 1999/1547, art. 2