Thread by @JasonBraier

1/ Greater Manchester Police v Aston - a rare case on judicial proceedings immunity in the context of whistleblowing and how the EAT should respond when it's brought up for the 1st time on appeal.

bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT…

#ukemplaw

2/ 3 police officers made protected disclosures whilst investigating misconduct, corruption & potential criminality amongst fellow officers, stemming from cover-up of shoplifting by a fellow officer. The ET had found 13 protected disclosures & 4 detriments proven.

3/ The claimants were appointed to investigate the matter, which they did. They found serious infractions & then sought to exit the investigation & handover to the IPCC. The IPCC determined it should remain with the force & referred it to the CPS who advised against charging.

4/ The police then considered misconduct charges against those reported on, but reviews were conducted at the same time which undermined the claimants' investigation. After disciplinary proceedings, 2 officers involved publicly criticised the claimants.

5/ One of the officers subject to disciplinary proceedings had brought an ET claim for detriment reliant on her own PID. In written & oral evidence she said DI Aston only interviewed her because she'd whistleblown against a Superintendent with whom DI Aston was friends.

6/ Judicial Proceedings Immunity wasn't argued before the ET, but the EAT found that wasn't a barrier to it being argued on appeal in this case. The EAT applied the principles set out in Rance to reach that conclusion.

7/ The situation (in which JPI hadn't been raised below even though the detriment was clearly covered by it) was exceptional, this was a matter of a pure point of law needing no added facts & JPI is a matter of important public policy considerations.

8/ Matters in the minus column concerning finality of litigation, the importance of putting all relevant matters before the ET, & that the failure to do so must've arisen from a lack of skill did not outweigh the factors in favour of allowing the point to be taken on appeal.

9/ Hence the Police's appeal was allowed in respect of the 1 detriment covered by JPI, but the appeal failed in respect of the other 3 detriments (on which there were less interesting arguments focussed on Blackbay Ventures v Gahir).