On 10 November 2026 the Employment Appeal Tribunal (“EAT”) handed down judgment in the case of Amidon v North London NHS Foundation Trust [2026] EAT 171, rejecting the Claimant’s appeal against an Employment Tribunal decision to dismiss her whistleblowing and discrimination claims.

The Claimant, a Child and Adolescent Psychotherapist, had brought proceedings against her employer. As part of her claim she argued that she had been treated to her detriment after blowing the whistle about matters relating to her role as an expert witness in family court proceedings. She relied on having made complaints to senior managers that her expert reports were being discredited, one report had been excluded from a court bundle, and on another occasion she was not called to give evidence at all. The Claimant claimed that this behaviour risked judges making the wrong decisions in complex family and care proceedings.

The Tribunal, rejecting the Claimant’s claim, concluded that none of the disclosures met the definition in the Employment Rights Act 1996 s 43B(1)(c) of information tending to show that “a miscarriage of justice has occurred, is occurring or is likely to occur”.

On appeal the EAT noted that the meaning of miscarriage of justice in the civil context has not previously received any appellate guidance. It dismissed the Claimant’s appeal and adopted the definition proposed by Thomas Cordrey, acting for the Respondent, that the term “miscarriage of justice” requires a “profound injustice or failure of the administration of justice”. The EAT agreed that disclosures about lesser errors of law, injustices or unfairness in legal proceedings would not meet that threshold. The Claimant’s disclosures fell outside statutory whistleblowing protection.

In reaching this decision the EAT has set strict limits on the applicability of s 43B(1)(c). The court observed  that the disclosure has to relate to the justice system and that it imposes “a requirement of gravity or seriousness” as to the matters on which the whistle had been blown.

Thomas Cordrey was instructed by DAC Beachcroft LLP for the Respondent NHS Trust. Lydia Seymour KC was instructed by Branch Austin McCormick LLP for the Appellant, Lynne Amidon.

The judgment is available here.