"I Have Cancer. Will the Employment Tribunal Automatically Protect My Identity?"

Unfortunately, the answer is often no.

An anonymity order is a mechanism that allows the Employment Tribunal to protect the identity of a person involved in proceedings.

In practice, this usually means that instead of publishing a party's full name in the judgment and other publicly available documents, the Tribunal identifies them by their initials or another anonymised reference.

Importantly, an anonymity order does not mean that the hearing is held in private or that the judgment is kept secret.

Many people assume that if their case involves a serious illness or highly sensitive medical information, anonymity will be granted automatically.

Unfortunately, obtaining an anonymity order is far more difficult than most people realise.

What is an anonymity order?

Since January 2025, anonymity orders in the Employment Tribunal have been governed by Rule 49 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024.

The Tribunal may make an anonymity order where it considers it necessary:

• in the interests of justice; or

• to protect a person's rights under the European Convention on Human Rights, particularly the right to respect for private life under Article 8.

Most commonly, this means replacing a party's name with initials in judgments and other publicly available documents.

Open justice comes first

Many claimants assume that because their case concerns their health, the Tribunal will automatically protect their identity.

That is not the starting point.

Employment Tribunal proceedings are governed by the principle of open justice.

This means that, as a general rule:

• hearings are public;

• judgments are published; and

• the public has a legitimate interest in knowing who is involved in court proceedings and why.

For that reason, anonymity is the exception, not the rule.

When deciding whether to grant an anonymity order, the Tribunal must balance an individual's right to privacy under Article 8 against the principle of open justice and freedom of expression under Article 10.

How does this work in practice?

Applications for anonymity most commonly arise in cases involving:

• serious medical conditions;

• mental health issues;

• disability discrimination;

• allegations of sexual misconduct or abuse; and

• other highly sensitive aspects of a person's private life.

However, the existence of sensitive medical evidence does not automatically justify anonymity.

Even where a Tribunal will hear detailed evidence about intimate medical treatment or long-term health conditions, it will still ask whether restricting open justice is genuinely necessary and proportionate.

When is anonymity more likely to be granted?

Every case turns on its own facts.

However, anonymity is generally more likely where identifying an individual could result in particularly serious consequences, for example:

• cases involving sexual offences or sexual abuse;

• children or especially vulnerable individuals;

• genuine risks to personal safety;

• exceptional psychiatric evidence demonstrating a real risk of significant harm; or

• other truly exceptional circumstances.

Ultimately, the Tribunal will always ask whether the individual's right to privacy outweighs the strong public interest in open justice.

What does this mean for employees?

If you are considering bringing a claim in the Employment Tribunal that involves your health, it is worth discussing anonymity with your solicitor.

However, it is important to understand that:

The fact that you have a serious medical condition - even cancer - does not automatically mean that the Tribunal will protect your identity.

Each application is considered on its own merits, and the person seeking anonymity must persuade the Tribunal that restricting open justice is both necessary and proportionate.

Final thoughts

Anonymity orders remain an important safeguard where they are genuinely justified.

However, in practice they are granted relatively rarely because the Tribunal starts from a strong presumption in favour of open justice.

Even cases involving cancer or highly personal medical information will not automatically meet the legal threshold.

That does not mean such applications should never be made. In many cases they are entirely appropriate.

What it does mean is that applicants should be aware that the threshold is high, and that the Tribunal will only depart from the principle of open justice where there is a compelling reason to do so.

Join the mailing list to receive legal updates: https://www.martainkin.co.uk/legal-updates