Case 8001112/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Mooney v Hope South West Limited (In Liquidation) — 2025
- Case reference
- 8001112/2024
- Decision date
- 15 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Doherty
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Mooney
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting in Glasgow before Employment Judge L Doherty, held that Mr J Mooney’s claim of automatically unfair dismissal under section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996 succeeded. It ordered Hope South West Limited (In Liquidation) to pay a monetary award of £38,210 in respect of that claim.
The tribunal also found that the claimant had suffered a detriment under section 48 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It awarded him £15,000 in respect of the loss suffered. In addition, the tribunal found that the respondent was in breach of the claimant’s contract of employment and ordered damages of £200.
Reasons were given orally. The judgment does not set out a separate breakdown between basic and compensatory elements of the dismissal award, so the recorded figures are taken as stated in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Claim succeeded as automatically unfair dismissal under section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Upheld | — | £38,210 |
| Whistleblowing | Claim succeeded as detriment under section 48 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, with £15,000 awarded in respect of loss suffered. | Upheld | — | £15,000 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the respondent in breach of contract and awarded damages of £200. | Upheld | — | £200 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £53,410
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.103A ERA 1996
- s.48 ERA 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.