Whistleblowing detriment claims partially struck out for being out of time
A former employee's whistleblowing detriment claims against BAE Systems have been partially struck out as out of time, but her constructive dismissal and some other claims can proceed.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #whistleblowing
- #public-interest-disclosure
- #time-limits
- #series-of-similar-acts
- #strike-out
- #reasonable-practicability
Key facts
- The claimant made protected disclosures about unauthorised access to her work PC in June and November 2020.
- The claimant alleged various detriments including being asked to complete a Change of Circumstances form, denied access to the company doctor, and receiving a threatening email from the second respondent.
- The respondent applied to strike out the detriment claims as being out of time.
- The tribunal struck out some allegations (e.g., Change of Circumstances form, counselling request delay) but allowed others to proceed against the first respondent.
- All claims against the second respondent were struck out as the only allegation against him was a single email sent over 12 months before the claim.
Timeline
-
First protected disclosure
Claimant emailed Rachel Hodson reporting unauthorised access to her work PC.
-
Second protected disclosure
Claimant emailed Mark Applegate about her PC being remotely accessed.
-
Third protected disclosure
Claimant emailed Julie Starling following up on a verbal report about unauthorised PC access.
-
Threatening email from second respondent
Claimant received an email from Steve Kent discouraging her from pursuing her complaint further.
-
Denied access to company doctor
Claimant was denied access to the company doctor on grounds of a 'security issue'.
-
Disciplinary investigation commenced
Claimant faced a disciplinary investigation into claims she had been aggressive and disruptive.
-
Counselling request ignored
Claimant requested further counselling support but it was ignored until December 2021.
-
Decision to resume disciplinary process
The respondent decided to resume disciplinary proceedings against the claimant.
-
Claim presented to tribunal
Claimant presented her claim to the employment tribunal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's whistleblowing detriment claims were brought outside the three-month time limit and should be struck out, and whether claims against an individual respondent should be struck out.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out allegations relating to a Change of Circumstances form, failure to follow the UK grievance procedure, and a delay in counselling support, as they were out of time and not part of a continuing act or series of similar acts.
All claims against the second respondent, Mr Steve Kent, were struck out because the only allegation against him was a single email sent over 12 months before the claim was presented.
However, other whistleblowing detriment claims against BAE Systems, including constructive or automatically unfair dismissal, were allowed to proceed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Time limits for whistleblowing claims are strict – you generally have three months from the last act of detriment to bring a claim.
- Relying on an internal grievance process does not pause the time limit for bringing a tribunal claim.
- A single isolated act against an individual respondent is unlikely to be saved by a 'series of similar acts' argument if it is significantly out of time.
- Ill health or lack of legal representation may not excuse a delay unless you can show it was not reasonably practicable to bring the claim in time.
What this case shows in practice
This case illustrates the strict time limits that apply to whistleblowing detriment claims. The former employee believed she had to exhaust the internal grievance procedure before bringing a tribunal claim, but the tribunal made clear that the three-month time limit runs from each alleged act of detriment, not from the end of the grievance process. Even where an employee is off sick and acting without legal help, the tribunal will expect them to show that it was not reasonably practicable to bring the claim in time – a high bar.
What the losing side could have done differently
The claimant could have sought early legal advice on time limits, rather than waiting for the grievance outcome. She could also have presented a protective claim within the initial three-month window to preserve her rights while the grievance continued. For the respondent, the strike-out application succeeded in part, but the case will continue on other allegations – meaning the employer still faces a full hearing on some claims.
Why the result matters for similar claims
This decision reinforces that whistleblowing claimants must act quickly. Even if an employer encourages you to use internal procedures, the tribunal clock is ticking. It also shows that claims against individual employees can be struck out if the only alleged act is a single, time-barred incident. For employers, the case is a reminder that not all detriment allegations will be struck out – some will survive to a full hearing, especially if they relate to ongoing conduct or dismissal.
Similar cases
Lead Software Consultant's whistleblowing claims dismissed as out of time
An employment tribunal struck out a Lead Software Consultant's whistleblowing detriment and automatically unfair dismissal claims, leaving only an ordinary unfair dismissal claim to proceed. The tribunal also refused the employer's bid to strike out the remaining claim due to the claimant's conduct.
Night care assistant dismissed for sleeping on duty: dismissal upheld
A night care assistant who was found asleep on three occasions was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct. The tribunal also rejected his claims of discrimination and whistleblowing detriment.
Care worker's whistleblowing detriment claims dismissed after tribunal rejects late amendments
An employment tribunal dismissed a care worker's claims that he suffered detriments for making protected disclosures, and refused to allow him to add a religion/belief discrimination claim that was out of time.
Threatening emails and abuse of witnesses: claim struck out as vexatious
A former employee who sent threatening emails to colleagues and called a witness a liar outside the tribunal room had his unfair dismissal claim struck out. The tribunal said a fair trial was no longer possible.