Mrs Jhuti went to work for Royal Mail Group. She became
concerned that colleagues were acting unlawfully and blew the whistle. Her line
manager subjected her to performance reviews that amounted to bullying and
portrayed her, inaccurately, as failing. A more senior manager dismissed Ms
Jhuti relying honestly on the false picture created by the line manager.
Was the reason or principal reason for the dismissal the
fact that Ms Jhuti had made protected disclosures? The Employment Tribunal and
Court of Appeal concluded that the question was to be answered by focusing only
on the mind of the person who took the decision to dismiss, even if that
decision was the inevitable consequence of the line manager’s actions. The EAT
and now the Supreme Court decided that when identifying the employer’s reason,
one may need to look more widely than the mind of the decision-maker. Here the
principal reason for dismissal was the protected disclosures.
The full judgment can be found on BAILII here.
Sean Jones KC acted pro bono for the Appellant, Ms Jhuti,
leading Matt Jackson of 10KBW who was sole counsel before the ET, EAT and Court
of Appeal.
