Claimant v Applied Technology Developments Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal heard evidence and submissions from both parties and concluded that the claimant was not subjected to a detriment for making a protected disclosure. The claim was dismissed on its merits.
The tribunal concluded that the claimant was not automatically unfairly dismissed for making a protected disclosure. The whistleblowing element of the dismissal claim was rejected, though the dismissal itself was found to be unfair on ordinary grounds.
The tribunal found that the respondent nonetheless unfairly dismissed the claimant under ordinary unfair dismissal principles. The tribunal awarded compensatory damages for loss of earnings, pension contributions, and loss of statutory rights.
The parties consented to judgment for notice pay in the sum of £1,485.75 gross, which the tribunal ordered by consent. This reflects the claimant's entitlement to contractual notice pay.
Facts
The claimant was employed by Applied Technology Developments Limited and his employment terminated on 30 November 2023. He brought claims for detriment and automatic unfair dismissal related to alleged protected disclosures (whistleblowing), as well as ordinary unfair dismissal and breach of contract for notice pay. The parties reached agreement on the notice pay claim during the hearing.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the whistleblowing-related claims, finding the claimant was neither subjected to detriment nor automatically unfairly dismissed for making protected disclosures. However, the tribunal found the dismissal was nonetheless unfair on ordinary grounds and awarded compensation totaling £2,252.44 plus notice pay of £1,485.76 by consent.
Practical note
A dismissal can be ordinarily unfair even where the specific whistleblowing automatic unfair dismissal claim fails, and unrepresented claimants may still succeed on substantive unfair dismissal claims despite losing on more complex whistleblowing allegations.
Award breakdown
Case details
- Case number
- 6000738/2024
- Decision date
- 16 December 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- technology
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No