The Appellant had been employed by the Respondent, which provides a service to support vulnerable adults, and was dismissed for a reason relating to conduct. In the ET, she claimed that: she had been dismissed by reason of protected disclosures contrary to s 103 Employment Rights Act 1996 ("ERA"); she had been unfairly dismissed contrary to s 98 ERA; and she was entitled to outstanding holiday pay. The ET rejected all of her claims, and she appealed to the EAT.

The EAT held that the ET had erred in its consideration of the burden of proof in relation to the protected disclosures, but that error did not actually affect the outcome on this issue; as to the unfair dismissal claim, the ET had approached the matter correctly; and the ET had correctly quantified the holiday pay claim.