Rogerson (Respondent) v Erhard-Jensen Ontological/Phenomenological Initiative Limited (Appellant)

Case summary

Case ID

UKSC/2026/0013

Parties

Appellant(s)

Erhard-Jensen Ontological/Phenomenological Initiative Ltd

Respondent(s)

Daniel Rogerson

Issue

Does judicial proceedings immunity cover the commencement of arbitration proceedings?

Facts

On 26 April 2016, Mr Rogerson entered into a “Confidentiality and Independent Consulting Agreement” (the “Agreement”) with Erhard-Jensen Ontological/Phenomenological Initiative Ltd (“Erhard-Jensen”), a Singapore-based charity. The Agreement contained an arbitration clause in favour of an arbitration seated in Singapore. In April 2019, Mr Rogerson resigned from his position with Erhard-Jensen. After his resignation, Mr Rogerson made allegations that Mr Werner Erhard had been verbally and physically abusive towards staff. On 21 April 2021, Erhard-Jensen instigated arbitration proceedings in Singapore. Erhard-Jensen claimed that Mr Rogerson had breached his confidentiality obligations under the Agreement. On 15 November 2021, Mr Rogerson commenced proceedings against Erhard-Jensen in the Employment Tribunal. He brought a claim for post-termination detriment for making protected disclosures under sections 47B(1) and 48(1A) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Mr Rogerson argued that his allegations against Mr Erhard were protected disclosures and that he was subjected to detriments by Erhard-Jensen because he made these protected disclosures. Mr Rogerson based his claim on three detriments. One of these detriments was the commencement of the arbitration proceedings in Singapore. The Employment Tribunal refused to strike out Mr Rogerson’s claim for detriment based on the commencement of the arbitration proceedings. The Employment Appeal Tribunal overturned the decision of the Employment Tribunal. The Court of Appeal overturned the decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal and restored the decision of the Employment Tribunal. Erhard-Jensen now seeks permission to appeal to the Supreme Court.

Date of issue

6 February 2026

Case origin

PTA

Back to top