[Thanks to Louise Jones of Temple Garden Chambers for providing this case summary]
The EAT (Wilkie J) has handed down its judgment in Goode v Marks & Spencer, which is authority for the proposition that the expression of an opinion about an employer's proposal, after consultation, to change a discretionary enhanced redundancy scheme does not amount to a qualifying or protected disclosure.
The Appellant had taken a number of steps, including complaining to his line manager, contacting the Times and completing a survey, which he sought to argue were protected disclosures - all in relation to the detail of a proposed redundancy scheme - which should entitle him to the protection of section 103A ERA and render his subsequent dismissal automatically unfair. Such information as the Appellant sought to rely on to establish that protected disclosures had been made was not enough to be the subject of a reasonable belief that it tended to show that the Respondent was likely to fail to comply with any legal obligation to which it was subject. The appeal was dismissed.