The Claimant worked for the Respondent and was dismissed for poor performance. She claimed in the ET that she had made protected disclosures (that is, qualifying disclosures within the meaning of section 43A of the Employment Rights Act 1996 ("ERA")) and that she had been dismissed or subjected to detriments for making such disclosures. The ET, having considered all of the disclosures and the alleged detriments, concluded that the sole reason for the Claimant's dismissal was her poor performance and rejected her claim. The Claimant appealed on the grounds that the ET erred in finding that specific disclosures did not amount to qualifying disclosures for the purposes of section 43B ERA, and that the ET commenced its consideration of whether the Claimant was subjected to the alleged detriments on the grounds that she had made protected disclosures on an erroneous basis.

The EAT held that the ET had approached the question of whether any of the statements relied on by the Claimant were qualifying disclosures within the meaning of section 43A ERA on the correct legal basis, and it had reached conclusions that it was entitled to reach on the evidence before it.