# Case (Unfair dismissal and whistleblowing). Dr A Malik v Cygnet Behavioural Health Ltd (reconsideration) \[2021\] MHLO 7 (ET)

**URL:** <https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/t/case-unfair-dismissal-and-whistleblowing-dr-a-malik-v-cygnet-behavioural-health-ltd-reconsideration-2021-mhlo-7-et/3006>\
**Category:** MHLO updates\
**Created:** [2 December 2024 21:52 UTC](https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/t/case-unfair-dismissal-and-whistleblowing-dr-a-malik-v-cygnet-behavioural-health-ltd-reconsideration-2021-mhlo-7-et/3006 "2024-12-02T21:52:00Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![MHLO](https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/user_avatar/forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/mhlo/32/24_2.png) [@MHLO](https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/u/MHLO)\
**Post date:** [2 December 2024 21:52 UTC](https://forum.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/t/case-unfair-dismissal-and-whistleblowing-dr-a-malik-v-cygnet-behavioural-health-ltd-reconsideration-2021-mhlo-7-et/3006/1 "2024-12-02T21:52:00Z")

</div>

— The claimant sought reconsideration as the original decision contained no specific decision in relation to one of the argued detriments, part 1 of which was her suspension in relation to administration of covert medication, and part 2 of which was the inadequate appeal against dismissal. Part 1 was presented out of time but part 2 was presented in time. The tribunal rejected the respondent's argument that its Article 6 rights would be breached by a finding being made months after the trial, but went on to decide that the appeal was part of the dismissal so was excluded as a detriment and, an any event, was not motivated by the public interest disclosures.

* * *
Full details available at: [https://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/Dr\_A\_Malik\_v\_Cygnet\_Behavioural\_Health\_Ltd\_(reconsideration)\_(2021)\_MHLO\_7\_(ET)?id=021224-2152](https://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/Dr_A_Malik_v_Cygnet_Behavioural_Health_Ltd_(reconsideration)_(2021)_MHLO_7_(ET)?id=021224-2152)