DNA Vetcare Ltd

1 of 11 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Heard at Croydon (by video) On 23 January 2026 Claimant Dr Alexandra Weinberg Respondent DNA Vetcare Ltd Before Employment Judge Fowell Appearances Claimant In Person Respondent Grant Williams, for Peninsula Business Services Ltd JUDGMENT ON A PRELIMINARY ISSUE The application for interim relief is dismissed REASONS Introduction 1. These written reasons are provided at the request of Dr Weinberg following oral reasons given earlier today. As usual some editing has taken place for the sake of clarity and these written reasons shall stand as the final version. 2. This is an application for “interim relief”, which is a term used for various orders a Tribunal can make shortly after someone is dismissed, the most common being that they are reinstated to their old job until a final hearing. If the employer refuses they can even be ordered to carry on paying the employee’s wages until the final hearing, so it is a powerful remedy. 3. There are very limited circumstances in which such an order can be made. The application has to be made promptly i.e. within seven days of dismissal, and it is only available for some types of dismissal, including, as here, for whistleblowing, or more precisely, for making “a protected disclosure”. 4. The relevant provisions governing the exercise of these powers is set out in section 128 and 129 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Section 128 states that 2 of 11 an application can succeed where it is ‘likely’ that the Tribunal will ultimately find in favour of the employee. 5. How likely is ‘likely’? The Employment Appeal Tribunal decided in the case of Taplin v C, Shippam Limited [1978] ICR 1068 that this meant that the claim needed a ‘pretty good chance’ of success. 6. That case has been considered more recently by the Employment Appeal Tribunal in Ministry of Justice v Sarfraz 2011 IRLR 562, EAT. There, ...