SFO’s former senior investigator brings whistleblowing detriment claim to employment tribunal – lessons to learn

The Philip Jackson vs. SFO tribunal, a London employment tribunal involving Philip Jackson, a former investigator at the Serious Fraud Office (SFO), has drawn attention and offers some insight into whistleblowing rules.

Background of the Case

Jackson had alleged that:

• SFO staff were instructed not to record anything critical of investigations in writing, fearing it could undermine prosecutions.
• He was told to raise concerns orally in meetings rather than via email.
• This practice violated the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act (CPIA) code of practice

SFO’s Response

The SFO denied Jackson’s allegations, stating:

• His disclosures did not meet the legal definition of protected whistleblowing.
• The approach to oral concerns was part of a tiered system to manage case records efficiently.
• Written records were maintained in line with CPIA requirements

Tribunal Findings

On 3 October 2025, the tribunal concluded that Jackson:

• Drew “self-serving meanings” from words and phrases.
• Misinterpreted statements made by a case controller at the SFO

This ruling came in response to Jackson’s whistleblowing and retaliation claim against the SFO, which he ultimately lost.

WHISTLEBLOWING LESSONS

The Philip Jackson vs. SFO tribunal case offers several important lessons for whistleblowing, particularly for compliance professionals, investigators, and regulated institutions.

Here are the key takeaways:

1. Clarity in Whistleblowing Procedures Is Crucial

Jackson alleged that SFO staff were discouraged from recording concerns in writing, which he believed violated the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act (CPIA). The SFO countered that worries were to be raised orally first, as part of a tiered documentation system.

Lesson: Organisations must have clear, documented whistleblowing procedures that specify:

• What constitutes a reportable concern.
• How and where concerns should be raised.
• How concerns are escalated and recorded.

2. Written Records Matter — But So Does Context

Jackson argued that discouraging written emails undermined transparency. The SFO maintained that written records were created after oral filtering to avoid clutter and ensure compliance with the CPIA.

Lesson: While oral discussions can help filter issues, written documentation is essential for accountability. A balance must be struck between managing data volume and ensuring transparency.

3. Timing and Motivation Can Affect Credibility

The tribunal noted that Jackson’s disclosures were made after his temporary promotion had ended, raising questions about his motive.

Lesson: Whistleblowers should raise concerns promptly and consistently, and organisations should assess disclosures objectively, regardless of timing or personal circumstances.

4. Legal Definitions of Whistleblowing Are Narrow

The SFO successfully argued that Jackson’s disclosures did not meet the legal definition of protected whistleblowing under UK law.

Lesson: Not all concerns qualify as protected disclosures. Whistleblowers and employers must understand:

• The Public Interest Disclosure Act (PIDA) criteria.
• What constitutes a protected disclosure.
• The importance of legal advice before making a claim.

5. Culture and Tone Matter

Jackson claimed the oral-first approach discouraged staff from speaking up. The SFO stated that it was a practical method for managing complex cases.

Lesson: A whistleblowing culture must be encouraging, not intimidating. Even well-intentioned policies can backfire if they discourage openness or create fear of retaliation.

References

[1] globalinvestigationsreview.com https://globalinvestigationsreview.com/article/ex-sfo-investigator-loses-retaliation-claim-against-agency

[2] www.lawgazette.co.uk https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/former-sfo-investigator-brings-whistleblowing-claim-to-tribunal/5124558.article

[3] www.lawgazette.co.uk https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/sfo-manager-defends-no-concerns-in-writing-policy/5124594.article