Over the past few months, our Employment team has noticed a rise in employees seeking interim relief when they have been dismissed following issues at work, such as whistleblowing or disability discrimination. Interim relief can be incredibly useful in securing an employee’s full pay until their litigation has concluded, however it is important to bear in mind the complications that may arise when pursuing this at Tribunal. As of 22 June 2026, new Presidential Guidance has taken effect, which Curzon Green’s employment solicitors break down in this article.
One of the benefits of interim relief is that these applications are heard much faster than typical employment claims at Tribunal. While employment claims usually take months, and more recently are taking years, to progress to final hearing, interim relief is an emergency measure, and applications must be made within 7 days of the employee’s effective date of termination in order to prevent the dismissal from taking place. However, there are only a certain number of claims for which interim relief is applicable, and there is a much higher threshold to pass for success.
To qualify for interim relief, an employee must have been unfairly dismissed and the reason for dismissal was one of the following:
· Being a member of a safety committee or acting as a designated health and safety representative;
· Acting as a representative of the workforce in regard to Schedule 1 of the Working Time Regulations 1998;
· Being, and performing the functions of, a trustee of an occupational pension scheme;
· Being a representative for consultations for redundancies or transfers of undertakings, or being a candidate for the same;
· Making a protected disclosure or blowing the whistle;
· Related to a list containing details of past and current members of trade unions or those who have or are taking part in the activities of trade unions, and is complied with a view to being used for the purposes of discrimination, which the employer relies on and knows, or should know, that the information relied on is prohibited;
· Doing, proposing to do, failing to do, or proposing to decline to do any of the following:
o Acting with a view to obtain or prevent recognition of a union by an employer;
o Indication of support or lack thereof for a union;
o Acting with a view to securing or preventing the ending of bargaining arrangements;
o Indication of support or lack thereof for ending bargaining arrangements;
o Seeking to or influencing how votes are cast by other workers in a ballot for trade union representation, including whether to vote or abstain; and
o Voting in such a ballot.
In addition to the limited circumstances under which an employee can pursue interim relief, this application has a high threshold for success. The legal test for the Tribunal is whether it is likely that the Tribunal will find that the reason or principal reason for dismissal was the reason relied upon by the employee. In other words, the employee should have a “pretty good chance of success” at their final hearing (Taplin v C Shippam Ltd (1978)), and it is insufficient for success to be more likely than not (Dandpat v The University of Bath (2009)). The Honourable Mr Justice Underhill specifically stated that treating the employment contract as continuing and having the employer continue to pay the employee “is not a consequence that should be imposed lightly”. The Tribunal will therefore consider all the circumstances of the claim, including any preliminary matters, not just the reason for dismissal.
From a more practical perspective, to have a “pretty good chance at success”, this usually will mean the employee has disclosed information to the employer (rather than just making an allegation), has a reasonable belief that the information tended to show one of the types of wrongdoing required to make a protected disclosure, and that this disclosure was made in the public interest as it affected other people, not just the employee. This, combined with the other hurdles an employee will face in making this application (specifically if there is significant documentation, if there are multiple issues at play, and the requirement to show the disclosure caused the dismissal), means this application, although not impossible, will be significantly more difficult to succeed with. For some employees, it may be more practical to resolve the issue via ACAS, in without prejudice discussions, or even at a final hearing, depending on whether this is affordable or whether there are other funding arrangements available. For more information on funding, please visit How to fund your employment law claim? | Curzon Green.
The amount of documentation provided for these applications is one of the reasons the Tribunal has issued this guidance. The hearing itself for interim relief applications is far more limited in terms of what is put before the judge. In order to make the process efficient, limited documentation is permitted and any material must be proportionate for the hearings. The hearing should only last a maximum of three hours (one hour for the judge to read the materials, one hour for the parties to make short oral submissions, and one hour for the judge to reach a decision and make a judgment), and if excessive material is provided, the judge will identify the most important documents on each side, and restrict consideration to those.
The second reason for issuing this guidance was the apparent increase in the use of artificial intelligence when submitting a claim. The Tribunal does not object to the use of
AI itself but has warned that submissions made using AI are too long and complex for interim relief applications, contain irrelevant material and do not focus on the key points of the case. If an employee uses AI to submit an application of this sort, they must ensure that it is concise and relevant, and, of course, accurate to the case. It can be difficult to decide what is the most relevant to include in these applications, and we would recommend seeking advice before submitting an application, if possible, while keeping in mind the 7-day window to submit the application and claim once dismissed.
Dealing with a claim at the Employment Tribunal can be particularly stressful for both employees and employers, and interim relief, if successful, can relieve some of the financial pressure that employees may face when dismissed, while placing additional financial pressure on an employer. There are, however, various hurdles to overcome before success, and it is best to receive advice as soon as possible once dismissed, or once an employer receives notice of this application. Often, it is better from a costs perspective for an employee to issue their claim, in the usual way (not applying for interim relief).
Should you require advice on making or responding to an interim relief application, our Employment team at Curzon Green are here to help at employment@curzongreen.co.uk or by calling one of our offices.