“Worker” definition considered in whistleblowing appeal


Re: Day v Health Education England & Ors [2017] EWCA Civ 329

Held that a trainee junior doctor who contended that he was subject to detriment after raising concerns about patient safety issues, could bring a whistleblowing claim against both the Trust that employed him and Health Education England, with whom he had a training agreement. The judgment considered the breadth of the definition of “worker” for such claims and confirmed that workers who claimed that they had been victimised for whistleblowing may be able to bring claims against any person who has substantially determined their terms of employment, and not just the formal employer.

James Laddie QC and Thomas Linden QC were involved in this case.