Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

20130729-An-employment-tribunal-si-006A crucial factor in determining whether a “protected disclosure” has been made is whether that disclosure was “in the public interest”. The case of Chesterton Global Ltd & Anor v Nurmohamed focussed upon how the “public interest” is defined and concluded that what matters is whether the person making the disclosure had a reasonable belief that the information disclosed was in the public interest, and not whether the disclosure was as a matter of fact in the public interest.

The facts

Mr  Nurmohamed was a Director at the Mayfair branch of Chestertons, the well-known estate agents. In 2013 Chestertons introduced a new commission structure. Mr Nurmohamed was unhappy that this new commission structure had been introduced as he believed it would have a significant detrimental impact on his income.

In August, September and October 2013 Mr Nurmohamed made three alleged protected disclosures regarding the fact that he was concerned that there were discrepancies between the profit-loss accounts of the Mayfair office and the corporate figures, and that he believed that the accounts were being manipulated for the benefit of the shareholders to the detriment of approximately 100 senior managers.

Mr Nurmohamed subsequently made a claim in the Employment Tribunal that he had been subjected to detriments and dismissed because he had made the alleged protected disclosures. In order to succeed with his claim, Mr Nurmohamed had to show the following:

  1. That there had been disclosure(s) of information;
  2. That in the reasonable belief of the work the disclosure of information tended to show that there had been (or would be) a breach of a legal obligation, that a criminal offence had been (or would be) committed, that a miscarriage of justice had occurred (or would occur), that the health of safety of any individual had been endangered (or would be), that the environment had been damaged (or would be), or that information tending to show that any of the above had been deliberately concealed (or was likely to be); and
  3. That in the reasonable belief of the worker that the disclosure of the information was in the public interest

The Employment Tribunal concluded that the points 1 and 2 above were satisfied: they concluded that Mr Nurmohamed had made disclosures of information and that these disclosures had contained information tending to show that there had been a breach of a legal obligation or that there was likely to be a breach of a legal obligation.

The Tribunal then went on to consider whether the disclosure of information had been “in the public interest”, concluding that following the wording of the statute the disclosure did not need to be in the public interest per se but that the worker simply had to have a reasonable belief that the disclosure of information was in the public interest. In any event, the Tribunal concluded that the disclosures were in the public interest as they affected 100 persons and that this was a significant enough number of people to render the disclosure “in the public interest”.

The Tribunal went on to conclude that Mr Nurmohamed had been subjected to detriments and dismissed because of his protected disclosures.

Chesterton’s appealed this judgment to the Employment Appeal Tribunal on the grounds that (1) the he Tribunal made an error of law in concluding that disclosures made in the interest of the 100 senior managers was to a sufficient group of the public to amount to being a matter in the public interest; and (2) it was for the Tribunal to objectively determine (not subjectively) whether or not the disclosures were of real public interest, and the Tribunal had failed to do this.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal rejected both grounds of appeal, upholding the judgment of the Employment Tribunal. The EAT concluded that the question of whether a disclosure is made in the public interest is subjective to the worker and depends upon whether they have a reasonable belief that the disclosure was in the public interest.

What does this mean for me

If you are thinking of ‘blowing the whistle’ on your employer then you will need to do one of two things (or, preferably, both):

  1. Demonstrate that any “protected disclosure” that you make is objectively in the public interest; and/or
  2. Make sure that you impress on your employer that you have a belief that any disclosure of information that you make is in the public interest, and that this belief is reasonable

As always, put your views on these issues in writing to your employer so you don’t have to argue over them at a later date. Don’t rely on having to prove that you had conversations with third parties – this can sometimes be tricky.

If you’re an employer, then the difficulty here is that there has been a widening of the law which potentially restricts your ability to defend a ‘whistleblowing’ case. However, and as always, there are various layers of defence open to an employer in a whistleblowing case, and the employer can still exercise those.

Why is this case significant?

This case is important as it gives employees (and their representatives) greater scope to argue that a disclosure was “in the public interest”, and therefore a protected disclosure. All the worker needs to do is to show that there has been a “qualifying disclosure” and that the worker had a belief that the qualifying disclosure was in the public interest. What is essential is that the worker’s belief must be reasonable.

Case: Chesterton Global Ltd (t/a Chestertons) & Anor v Nurmohamed [2015] UKEAT 0335_14_0804

About Chris Hadrill

Chris is a specialist employment lawyer at Redmans. He specialises in contentious and non-contentious employment matters, including breach of contract claims, compromise agreements and Employment Tribunal cases. He writes on employment law matters on a variety of websites, including Direct 2 Lawyers, Lawontheweb.co.uk, LegalVoice, the Justice Gap and his own blog. Contact Chris by emailing him at chadrill@redmans.co.uk

Share →

Our awards

Request a callback

Your name

Your email

Your telephone number

Contact us

Please feel free to discuss your own position and concerns. Contact your nearest office on:

T: 020 3397 3603
E: enquiries@redmans.co.uk
W: www.redmans.co.uk


4.64 Average

28 Reviews


Excellent service from initial contact to deliverables.

Posted 2 days ago

Virginia K

Yes, Chris Hadrill answered all my questions and I feel more confident with my current situation

Posted 2 days ago


Chris Hadrill was referred to me my a friend of mine. I found the service to be efficient, quick and like Chris's direct approach to my work. Well done and thank you Chris!

Posted 3 days ago

Andy W

Very prompt & structured service that helped put my mind at rest at a difficult time

Posted 5 days ago


I have found Redmans to be very helpful, diligant and thoroughly professional when dealing with them, plus they gone that extra mile for me !

Posted 3 weeks ago


Thank you to Chris Hadrill at Redmans for his assistance in settling my case. I contacted him at the very last minute and he was happy to help me and managed to get everything done on time and in a very professional manner. I will definitely be happy to work with him again .

Posted 3 weeks ago

Redman's provided excellent legal employment advice for me during a difficult time in my employment. Chris was my lawyer, super efficient, quick, reliable and clearly very experienced in the matter. Could not ask for a better law firm to deal with your query if you are in need of some help. Would definitely use them again in the future. Highly recommending Chris.

Posted 4 months ago


Chris Hadrill was very professional and responsive. I would highly recommend him

Posted 4 months ago


Very Efficient, with very quick email reply’s. I had a matter that needed resolving within a very short space of time and Redmans Solicitors were great with dealing with my matter quickly.

Posted 4 months ago


At Redmans the solicitor that was dealing with me was Chris. He dealt with my situation smoothly with clear guidance and explanation

Posted 4 months ago


Clear, concise advice and guidance delivered by an experienced and very capable solicitor, within the timelines required

Posted 5 months ago


Very efficient service. I never had to wIt for more than a day for a reply to any of my queries and the matter was dealt with swiftly.

Posted 5 months ago


Very timely, thorough and helpful advice. Friendly and considerate of the needs of the client

Posted 5 months ago


Very prompt and attention to detail. Thank you for the service

Posted 5 months ago


Couldn’t be happier with how Redmans successfully handled our seemingly tricky case. By being clear and detailed every step of the way, with the utmost professionalism and courtesy, they made it an informative and eye-opening process, taking the stress out of the situation and ultimately delivered what you would want from such a service. I fully appreciate everything they have done, and if I am ever in need of such services in the future, they will be the first number I contact. Excellent.

Posted 5 months ago


Excellent work delivered with great quality

Posted 5 months ago


Chris Hadrill was a great help both in terms of his advice and his expertise. He explained my options to me clearly and concisely enabling me to quickly make the right decision for me in the circumstance. I would not hesitate to recommend Chris or Redmans to friends or colleagues, and would certainly make Redmans my first port of call should I require a similar service in the future.

Posted 5 months ago


Redmans gave excellent advice and helped me understand everything in clear concepts. Thank you!

Posted 5 months ago


Resolved my issues

Posted 5 months ago


Quick fast professional service.

Posted 5 months ago


"Prompt, efficient and practical advice that resulted in me getting some additional money tax free."

Posted 5 months ago