In welcome information for employers, the EAT has dominated in Sullivan v Isle of White Council that exterior job candidates can’t deliver a whistleblowing detriment declare towards a potential employer (aside from the NHS, which is expressly lined to guard affected person security).

The claimant had sought to argue that the European Conference of Human Rights’ prohibition on discrimination due to ‘standing’ may very well be used to increase whistleblowing safety to exterior job candidates in the identical approach because the Supreme Court docket had used it to guard office-holders in Gilham v Ministry of Justice (on the premise that their standing is analogous to that of ‘employees’ – see additional right here).

The EAT rejected this argument, ruling that exterior job candidates should not analogous to inner job candidates (who shall be present employees and have whistleblowing safety as such), nor to NHS job candidates (given the actual affected person security concern). It will require legislative modification by parliament to increase safety to exterior job candidates.