Mr D Donaghay v Asda Stores Limited — 2022

Case reference: 1601087/2021
Decision date: 25 July 2022
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge S Moore Representation
Venue: Cardiff

Indexed: 18 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr D Donaghay

Respondent

Asda Stores Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal recorded judgment after a hearing at Cardiff before Employment Judge S Moore. It found that the claimant was unfairly dismissed contrary to s.94 Employment Rights Act 1996, and that claim succeeded.

The claimant's claim for unfair dismissal contrary to s.103A Employment Rights Act 1996 did not succeed and was dismissed. The judgment states that a remedy hearing would be listed, so no award or remedy breakdown was determined in this judgment.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The judgment states that the claimant was unfairly dismissed contrary to s.94 Employment Rights Act 1996 and that the claim succeeds. Remedy was reserved for a further hearing.	Upheld	—	—
Whistleblowing	The judgment describes this as a claim for unfair dismissal contrary to s.103A Employment Rights Act 1996; it did not succeed and was dismissed.	Dismissed	—	—

Legal tests applied

2 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

How we got this data

Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.

Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.