Nationwide Employment Lawyers
Legal enquiries and clients : 0333 242 3851
Get in Touch
Service Rating: Damian McCarthy 5 starts - Service Rate
  • About Us
    • Contact
    • Howell John
    • Damian McCarthy
    • Simon Armstrong
    • Case Studies
    • Employment Law News
  • Employee Services
    • Questionnaire
    • Contact
    • Locations
    • Dismissal
    • Whistleblowing Law
    • Discrimination
      • Sex discrimination
        • Maternity rights in employment
        • Pregnancy or maternity discrimination
        • Returning to work and flexible working
        • Health and safety for pregnant women in the workplace
        • Sexual Harassment
      • Disability discrimination
      • Race discrimination
    • Equal Pay
    • Bullying and Harassment
    • Family Friendly Rights
    • Disciplinary and grievance hearings
    • Contracts
    • Transfer of Undertakings
    • Agency workers and part time workers
    • Privacy at work
    • Constructive dismissal
    • Resignation letter templates
      • Constructive dismissal letter template
      • Standard notice resignation letter template:
      • Short or long notice request template
    • Health and Safety at Work
  • Locations
    • London – Berkeley Square
    • London – Canary Wharf
    • London – Croydon
    • London – Hammersmith
    • London – High Holborn
    • London – King’s Cross
    • London – Liverpool Street
    • London – London Bridge
    • London – Richmond
  • Case Studies
    • A v PWC
    • P v S (confidential)
    • Moira Stuart quits, reigniting BBC ageism row
    • Married HBOS bank manager propositioned by colleagues
  • News
  • FAQ
  • Contact



Chesterton Global v Nurmohamed: A Landmark Whistleblowing Case

A landmark ruling by the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) could herald changes to employment law.

 

The tribunal ruled in favour of a whistleblower as part of a decision to overlook the usual requirement of the EAT needing to be sure that an act of whistleblowing be in in the interest of the general public (as stipulated in the 2013 Public Interest Act). Instead the tribunal focused its decision on whether the whistleblower at the centre of the case personally believed his actions favoured public interest.

 

The EAT also ruled that the often ambiguous term ‘the public’ need not encompass the masses at large but can also be viewed in regards to smaller groups of people who are specifically affected by an act of whistleblowing.

 

Details of the case

Since 2013, UK law has stated that employees must provide sound evidence that whistleblowing claims are genuinely in the interest of public protection. The recent case of Chesterton Global vs Nurmohamed is the first to show some deviation from the 2013 ruling.

 

This groundbreaking case involved Mohamed Nurmohamed, a senior sales manager at the Mayfair office of Chestertons, who claimed he was unfairly dismissed from his position following his revealing information on company financial accounts being unduly rearranged for the financial benefit of shareholders. Such alteration to company accounts would result in lower commission payments for Mr Nurmohamed and one-hundred other high ranking Chesterton Global employees..

 

Mr Nurmohamed made three separate information disclosures to senior directors of Chesterton Global between August and October 2013. On these occasions he provided them with detailed spreadsheets and other records that validate his concern about company figures. He claimed that the business was deliberately mistaking costs in order to reduce managerial earnings.

 

This case is of particular interest as it can be easily argued that the successful outcome of Mr Nurmohamed’s whistleblowing will only affect the employees of Chesterton Global, rather than having an impact on the general public. However, the tribunal ruled that the one-hundred other employees affected make for a large enough number of people for this case to qualify as a public issue.

 

Chesterton Global makes an appeal

Chesterton Global has already appealed the ruling, claiming that public interest is not being upheld if all employees concerned are employed by the same company. The EAT dismissed this challenge and has again ruled in favour of Mr Nurmohamed.

 

Since the 2013 Public Interest Act came into practice, there has been widespread concern that potential whistleblowers with fair cases would be discouraged from speaking out for fear that their case would be dismissed for not having a great enough significance on the general population.

 

It seems the case of Chesterton Global vs Nurmohamed may have greatly challenged such a perspective.




Social Share
  • google-share

Our specialist areas of law

  • Employment Tribunals
    • Employment Tribunals London
  • Dismissal
    • Unfair Dismissal
    • Constructive Dismissal & Resignation Advice
    • Compromise agreements
    • Executive Dismissal
    • Whistleblowing Law
    • Redundancy claims
    • Age Discrimination & Redundancy – Protection for all Ages In Redundancy
    • Collective redundancy
  • Whistleblowing
    • Whistleblowing Law
  • Discrimination (overview)
    • Discrimination at work – overview
  • –– Sex Discrimination
    • Maternity rights in employment
    • Pregnancy or maternity discrimination
    • Returning to work and flexible working
    • Health and safety issues for pregnant women in the workplace
  • –– Disability discrimination
    • Disability discrimination
  • –– Race discrimination
    • Race discrimination
  • –– Age discrimination
    • Age discrimination in recruitment and selection
    • Age discrimination – your rights at retirement
    • Age discrimination and redundancy – protection for all ages in redundancy
    • Age discrimination and pensions
    • Age discrimination and benefits
  • –– Sexual-orientation discrimination
    • Sexual-orientation discrimination in goods and services
  • –– Religious discrimination
    • Religious discrimination
  • –– Gender reassignment discrimination
    • Gender reassignment discrimination
  • Equal pay
    • Equal pay
  • Bullying and Harassment
    • Bullying and harrasment at work
  • Family-friendly rights
    • Family leave
    • Maternity rights in employment
    • Pregnancy and maternity discrimination
    • Return to work and flexible working
    • Health and safety for pregnant women in the workplace
    • Paternity rights
    • Maternity
    • Part-time workers
  • Disciplinary and Grievance Hearings
    • Disciplinary Hearings & Procedures
    • Grievance procedures
  • Contracts
    • Bonus disputes and discrimination
    • Bonus disputes
    • Bonus discrimination & The Risks Associated With It
    • Contract disputes and permanent health insurance
    • Employment contract disputes – restrictive covenants
  • Transfer of Undertakings
    • Transfer of undertakings (TUPE)
  • Agency Workers and Part Time Workers
    • Agency workers
    • Part-time workers
  • Privacy at Work
    • Privacy at work
  • Letter Templates
    • Constructive dismissal letter template
    • Standard notice resignation letter template:
    • Short or long notice request template

Join our Newsletter!

Twitter

Damian McCarthy
  • I worked with Martin a few years ago on a lengthy case. Always seemed a man of integrity. https://t.co/CwTnxNq5QZ 08:49:06 PM May 19, 2023 from Twitter for iPhone ReplyRetweetFavorite
  • @NationCymru When I was a kid 1970’s - ‘80s always called “chip alley” … I think sometimes Caroline St. 08:47:37 PM May 19, 2023 from Twitter for iPhone in reply to NationCymru ReplyRetweetFavorite
  • @PhilipProudfoot What are you talking about ? King Charles unplugged my sink this morning and Camilla did my ironin… https://t.co/GawUMSYVH1 01:51:10 PM May 08, 2023 from Twitter for iPhone in reply to PhilipProudfoot ReplyRetweetFavorite
@dam_mccarthy

Contact Us

  • We will be able to help you quickly if you leave us a contact phone number. We keep this strictly confidential.
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Copyright Notice | Disclaimer | Website Terms & Conditions | Privacy Statement
ACAS | EHRC
Nationwide Employment Lawyers Ltd is Authorised and Regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. For peace of mind you can find information about our authorisation by checking the Registration number 838365 on the Financial Services Register : register.fca.org.uk. Please note all telephone calls are recorded, as required by the regulator. Nationwide Employment Lawyers Ltd is not a firm of solicitors. Instead we offer an exceptional level of service using specialist employment law Solicitors, Barristers and a Senior Advocate.
Please contact us using either the questionnaire, quick contact form (above) or telephoning us on 0333 242 3851.