Chorlton Family Practice (“CFP”) and Others

Case Summary

The claimant, a locum GP at Chorlton Family Practice in Manchester, claimed she was subjected to detriments for making protected disclosures about concerns regarding another doctor's practice. The respondents conceded the disclosures were protected but disputed causation. The tribunal found all claims not well-founded, as the claimant failed to establish that the alleged detriments were because of her protected disclosures.

The tribunal found that although the claimant made protected disclosures and the respondents conceded this, the claimant failed to establish the necessary causal connection between the protected disclosures and the alleged detriments. The respondents demonstrated that decisions about work allocation and termination of the locum engagement were made for legitimate business reasons unrelated to the whistleblowing, particularly the recruitment of salaried GPs and changed funding priorities.

Use these claim-type pages to compare this decision with other published tribunal cases, outcome patterns, and visible award data.

• •Whether claimant made protected disclosures
• •Whether claimant subjected to detriments for making protected disclosures
• •Whether claimant had worker status under s.230 ERA 1996
• •Time limits and jurisdiction
• •Causal connection between disclosures and alleged detriments

The full source document is available from the official publication page.