Kanlungan Filipino Consortium

1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Ms S. Cueva Respondent: Kanlungan Filipino Consortium Heard at: East London Hearing Centre On: 16 July 2025; and 18 July (in chambers) Before: Employment Judge Massarella Representation Claimant: Ms L. Palmer (solicitor) Respondent: Mr R. O’Keeffe (counsel) JUDGMENT The judgment of the Tribunal is that: - 1. the Claimant’s application for interim relief succeeds. REASONS Procedural history 1. The Claimant was dismissed on 12 March 2025. She presented her case on 18 March 2025. The claim form contains a claim of automatically unfair dismissal for whistleblowing (s.103 Employment Rights Act 1996). The Claimant claimed interim relief. 2. By letter dated 3 July 2025, the Tribunal acknowledged the application for interim relief and listing today’s hearing. 2 The hearing 3. I had a separate bundle of documents from each party, draft ET3s both in this case and in the Yilmaz litigation (for which see below), a witness statement from the Claimant but none from the Respondent, helpful written submissions from Mr O’Keeffe, supported by a bundle of authorities. I did not hear oral evidence. 4. I am grateful to both advocates for their assistance in navigating the material. The volume of material before me meant that I was not able to give an oral decision on the day. I reserved my judgment and deliberated in chambers on a further day. The law 5. By section 129(1) of the Employment Rights Act: where, on hearing an employee's application for interim relief, it appears to the tribunal that it is likely that on determining the complaint to which the application relates the tribunal will find— (a) that the reason (or if more than one the principal reason) for the dismissal is one of those specified in section 103A [...] 6. S.103A ERA provides that where the sole or principal reason for the dismissal is that an ...