Joanne works for a bank. A whistleblowing disclosure is a protected disclosure provided if: (i) the disclosure is not made anonymously; (ii) she makes the disclosure in good faith; (iii) she has reasonable grounds for believing that the bank has committed an offence under financial services legislation.

• A. (i) only
• B. (i) and (iii) only
• C. (ii) and (iii) only
• D. (i), (ii) and (iii)

Answer: (D)

A protected whistleblowing disclosure requires three things to be in place at once: it must not be anonymous, it must be made in good faith, and there must be reasonable grounds to believe the bank has committed an offence under financial services legislation.

Not being anonymous allows the regulator or the employer to verify the claim, follow up with appropriate investigations, and attribute the report to a source if needed. If the disclosure is anonymous, the process to investigate and protect the whistleblower becomes more difficult and less predictable, so protection is not considered to apply in that scenario.

Reporting in good faith means you genuinely believe there is a problem, not that you’re making up accusations or acting out of malice or spite. This helps ensure the system is used to address real issues rather than as a tool for personal vendettas.

Having reasonable grounds means there is some plausible basis or evidence for the belief that an offence under financial services legislation has occurred. It prevents frivolous or speculative claims from being shielded by protection and ensures there is a defensible basis for the investigation.

Because every one of these conditions is required, only disclosures that satisfy all three are protected. That’s why the correct understanding is that all three criteria must be met.