Case 8001674/2024 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 8001674/2024 Held in Aberdeen on & August, September & November 2025 Employment Judge J M Hendry Mr David Michael Low
The claimant worked for Ultra Catering Ltd at its King Street Pizza Hut store and repeatedly raised concerns about food safety, hygiene, stock dating, temperature checks, training, and related management practices. He later emailed Pizza Hut’s franchise manager on 3 May 2024 and sent further information up to 18 May 2024, including concerns about defrosting items in the oven, changing date tags, food poisoning incidents, missed checks, lack of repairs, and dough left out overnight. The tribunal found these were disclosures of information relating to customer safety and the safety of staff eating food at work.
Applying the whistleblowing provisions of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the tribunal held that the claimant believed the information was true, that he reasonably believed it was in the public interest, and that it was reasonable in the circumstances to contact the franchisor. It rejected the respondent’s case that the claimant was acting out of vendetta or sabotage, and found that although some personal frustration with management was present, the principal reason for the disclosures was genuine concern about food safety. The tribunal also noted the respondent had no whistleblowing policy or process directing staff how to raise such concerns internally, and that the franchisor had standards and audit powers relevant to the issues raised.
On 19 May 2024 Mr Khaira told the claimant that his pay would be cut, that he would be demoted from shift manager to in-store, and that he should work in Dunfermline. The tribunal found that this was impracticable because the claimant lived and studied in Aberdeen, that no further shifts were offered, and that the employment relationship ended because of the protected disclosures. It therefore found that the claimant had been unfairly dismissed for making protected disclosures. The tribunal awarded a basic award of £222.50 and a compensatory award of £11,047.64, making the total monetary award £11,270.14.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found that the claimant was unfairly dismissed for making protected disclosures about food safety and hygiene at the King Street Pizza Hut store. The reasons section refers to a basic award of £222.50 and compensatory losses, and the final monetary award stated was £11,270.14. The reasons also mention future loss of £8,616, but that figure is not reconciled with the final total in the extracted text. | Upheld | — | £11,270 |
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.