In Handa v Station Hotel [2025] EAT 62, the EAT (HHJ Auerbach sitting alone) considered an appeal against a decision of the employment tribunal to strike out the claimant’s claims of detriment on grounds of whistleblowing (protected disclosure) against the fourth and fifth respondents, both external HR consultants. The fourth respondent had investigated grievances raised against the claimant, two of which were found to be substantiated, and the fifth respondent had carried out the disciplinary process and issued a report finding disciplinary charges against the claimant to be substantiated, which led to the claimant being dismissed by the first respondent.
The EAT dismissed the appeal, holding that, while it was arguable that the fourth and fifth respondents acted as agents of the first respondent in carrying out the processes within their respective remits, to investigate, report and recommend, they could not be held liable as agents for the dismissal, as:
• a decision in respect of dismissal was not within the remit of either of them
• allegations that the first respondent had exerted control over their processes did not provide a basis for holding either of them liable as agents for the dismissal
• the claimant did not advance any other arguable doctrinal basis for any such agency liability, and
• the claimant did not claim that either of them had subjected him to a detriment because of whistleblowing.
Formed in 2017, following significant legislative changes designed to increase competition within the legal services marketplace, Pro Employment Law is a progressive set of barristers’ chambers, consisting only of experienced employment law barristers, offering a full range of specialist advisory, case management, and advocacy services directly to the public through the Public Access scheme. We supply our legal services exclusively in the area of Employment Law to clients located across England & Wales. All of the legal services we supply are covered by professional indemnity insurance with Bar Mutual.