header-logo header-logo

11 October 2024 / Will Burrows
Issue: 8089 / Categories: Opinion , Employment , Disclosure , Regulatory
printer mail-detail

Whistleblowing: need for change

192571
Will Burrows on why better protection is needed for those who report wrongdoing

The Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 and its incorporation into the Employment Rights Act 1996 provides important protections for whistleblowers against detriment or dismissal. If the disclosure is in the public interest and meets the requirements, the employee is protected by law, and is able to claim unlimited compensation in an employment tribunal if they are dismissed.

The major challenges whistleblowing clients face usually come only after they have tried to do the right thing by raising serious concerns to their employer. Whistleblowers often have a regulatory duty to raise concerns but then find themselves subjected to retaliation for doing so. They often end up losing their career, and then the only path to justice is via the employment tribunal system.

Pressure on the system means large cases may take up to three years to conclude. During this time, the client may be unable to earn an income. Some end up losing their homes, having to move

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
back-to-top-scroll