Case 2410092/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Moulding v Hippo Vehicle Solutions Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2410092/2022
- Decision date
- 12 December 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
- Venue
- Manchester
- Panel members
- Ms M Plimley, Ms D Kelly
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Moulding
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 6-8 December 2023 in Manchester, before Employment Judge Phil Allen sitting with Ms M Plimley and Ms D Kelly, the tribunal unanimously found that Mr C Moulding had made a protected disclosure to Hippo Vehicle Solutions Limited.
The tribunal also found that he was not subjected to a detriment for making that protected disclosure. His claim under section 47B of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was therefore not well-founded and was dismissed. The record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The tribunal found that the claimant did make a protected disclosure, but it found he was not subjected to a detriment for making that disclosure. The section 47B Employment Rights Act 1996 claim was dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.47B Employment Rights Act 1996
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe 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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.