Some months ago we reported on the case involving Clyde & Co Llp and a former member of the firm called Ms Bates Van Winklehof who had brought a whistleblowing complaint against the firm in which she alleged that she had suffered a number of detriments including the fact that she had been expelled as a member.
Her entitlement to bring a claim was based on the fact that she argued that she should be regarded as a “worker” so within the meaning of the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998. The employment tribunal said that it was not satisfied that she was a “worker” and therefore determined that she could not pursue her claim. In our previous note on this subject we reported that Ms Winklehof had successfully appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal. However, the case is now being heard by the Court of Appeal who have overturned the earlier decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal.
The Court of Appeal held that the Claimant was not in a subordinate position and could therefore not be regarded as a worker within the meaning the relevant definition. However they also determined that she could not be regarded as a worker because of Section 4 (4) of the Limited Liability Partnerships Act 2000. Consequently, the Claimant’s whistleblowing claim failed.