Case 8001287/2024 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 8001287/2024 Expenses Hearing held in Chambers in Aberdeen on December 2025 Employment Judge J M Hendry Mr Peter Finlay
This was an expenses hearing only. The respondent applied for expenses after the claimant had withdrawn the proceedings, which had included unfair dismissal and whistleblowing allegations arising from his relationship with Merlin Travel Group Ltd. The respondent said the claimant had acted unreasonably and that the claims had no reasonable prospects of success; the claimant said he could not be treated as a self-employed contractor in the way the respondent contended.
The judge set out the Rule 76 test and the authorities relied on by the parties. He noted that the claimant had been a litigant in person for much of the case, had some assistance from non-solicitor representatives, and had not completed his evidence when the hearing stopped. The judge also recorded that the claimant became seriously unwell during cross-examination and that the proceedings were later withdrawn because of ongoing health issues.
The application was refused. The judge held that it was difficult to prejudge the merits because the respondent's witnesses had not been heard and the evidence was incomplete. He did not accept that the claimant had been deliberately lying; instead, he considered that the claimant did not properly understand the legal and factual issues around worker or employee status, which are fact-sensitive and complex. He said that, on the material before him, he probably would not have struck out the claim, although he might have considered a deposit order if one had been sought.
The judge accepted that the respondent had been frustrated by the way the case had been conducted and that some of the correspondence from the claimant or on his behalf was ill-tempered, but he concluded that the threshold for an expenses order was not met. No expenses award was made.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Underlying unfair dismissal claim was withdrawn by the claimant on 9 June 2025 because of ongoing health issues; a withdrawal judgment was issued on 11 June 2025. This expenses judgment does not determine the merits. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Underlying public interest disclosure / whistleblowing complaint was withdrawn by the claimant on 9 June 2025 because of ongoing health issues; a withdrawal judgment was issued on 11 June 2025. This expenses judgment does not determine the merits. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
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.