Mr Donnellan v Sasa Food Ltd — 2025

Case reference: 6012595/2024
Decision date: 20 May 2025
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Childe REPRESENTATION

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr Donnellan

Respondent

Sasa Food Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal at Manchester, heard by CVP on 19 to 20 May 2025 before Employment Judge Childe, upheld Mr Donnellan's unfair dismissal complaint against Sasa Food Ltd. It found that the dismissal was unfair. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing.

On remedy-related findings, the tribunal said there was a 10% chance that the claimant would have been fairly dismissed in any event. It also found that the claimant caused or contributed to the dismissal by blameworthy conduct, so it reduced the compensatory award by 35%. For the same reason, it reduced the basic award by 35% because of the claimant's conduct before dismissal. The written decision record does not set out the underlying award figures or a total award.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The tribunal found the complaint well-founded and held that the claimant was unfairly dismissed. It also found a 10% chance that the claimant would have been fairly dismissed in any event, and reduced compensation by 35% for blameworthy conduct; the basic award was also reduced by 35% because of the claimant's conduct before dismissal.	Upheld	—	—

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.