Mr G Gallacher v JOA Leisure Ltd and Flip Out Ltd: 4105224/2022
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 August 2023 |
| Date | 01 August 2023 |
| Citation | 4105224/2022 |
| Court | Employment Tribunal |
| Published date | 21 August 2023 |
| Subject Matter | Public Interest Disclosure |
` EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND)
Case No: 4105224/2022
5
Final Hearing held in person at Glasgow on 13, 14 and 15 February 2023, and
continued Final Hearing (in person, but partly hybrid) on 5 April 2023;
and Deliberation at Members’ Meeting held in person on 18 May 2023
Employment Judge Ian McPherson
10
Tribunal Member Fiona Paton
Tribunal Member Robin Taggart
Mr George Gallacher Claimant
Represented by:
Mr Craig McCracken -
15
Trainee Solicitor
JOA Leisure Limited First Respondents
Represented by:
20
Mr Matthew Melling -
Operations Director
[Flip Out UK]
25
Flip Out Limited Second Respondents
Not present and
Not represented
[No ET3 response]
30
JUDGMENT OF THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL
The unanimous reserved judgment of the Employment Tribunal is that: -
(1) The Tribunal finds that the claimant’s employer as at the effective date of
35
termination of his employment on 29 June 2022 was the first respondents,
JOA Leisure Limited, trading as Flip Out Glasgow, and accordingly, of
consent of both compearing parties, dismisses the second respondents, Flip
Out Limited, from these Tribunal proceedings, in terms of Rule 34 of the
Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013, on the basis that they
40
4105224/2022 Page 2
were wrongly included by the claimant, and there are no issues between that
respondent and the claimant which it is in the interests of justice to have
determined in these proceedings.
(2) Having heard the evidence led by the claimant and first respondents, and
thereafter having heard closing submissions from their representatives, and
5
having reserved judgment to be given later, after time for private deliberation
in chambers, and the full Tribunal, having resumed consideration of the case
at a Members’ Meeting held in person on 18 May 2023, the Tribunal, after
private deliberation in chambers, now gives its reserved judgment as
follows:
10
(a) In respect of the claimant’s complaint of unfair dismissal contrary to
Section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the Tribunal finds
that the claimant was unfairly dismissed by the first respondents, as
they have failed to show that the claimant was redundant, and that they
fairly dismissed him for that reason.
15
(b) In respect of the claimant’s complaint of detriment for having made a
protected disclosure, contrary to Section 47B of the Employment
Rights Act 1996, the Tribunal finds that head of complaint against the
first respondents is well-founded.
(c) Further, in respect of the claimant’s complaint of automatically unfair
20
dismissal, for having been dismissed after having made a protected
disclosure, contrary to Section 103A of the Employment Rights Act
1996, the Tribunal finds that head of complaint against the first
respondents is also well-founded.
(d) Accordingly, in respect of those successful heads of complaint, upheld
25
by the Tribunal, the Tribunal awards no basic award of compensation
for unfair dismissal to the claimant, in terms of Section 118 of the
Employment Rights Act 1996, payable to him by the first
respondents, because they paid to him a redundancy payment in the
amount of Four thousand, two hundred and eighty two pounds,
30
fifty pence (£4282.50) on 5 July 2022, and that payment reduces his
4105224/2022 Page 3
basic award to £ nil, in terms of Section 122(4) of the Employment
Rights Act 1996.
(e) Further, in respect of his unfair dismissal by the first respondents, the
Tribunal awards a compensatory award of compensation to the
claimant, in terms of Section 123 of the Employment Rights Act
5
1996, payable to him by the first respondents, in the amount of FIFTY-
FOUR THOUSAND, NINE HUNDRED AND TWENTY-SEVEN
POUNDS, FORTY-SIX PENCE (£54,927.46).
(f) For the purposes of the Employment Protection (Recoupment of
Benefits) Regulation 1996, as amended, the claimant having been in
10
receipt of Jobseekers’ Allowance paid by the Department for Work and
Pensions, the prescribed element, applicable to the claimant’s past
loss in the 40-week period between 29 June 2022 and 5 April 2023, is
£32,485.08, and £22,442.38 is the amount by which the monetary
award exceeds the prescribed element. The Secretary of State may
15
seek to recoup that benefit by service of a Recoupment Notice upon
the first respondents.
(g) In respect of injury to the claimant’s feelings, in respect of
whistleblowing detriment, contrary to Section 47B of the
Employment Rights Act 1996, the Tribunal awards compensation for
20
injury to feelings, payable to him by the first respondents, in the further
amount of FIFTEEN THOUSAND POUNDS (£15,000).
(3) The Tribunal declines to impose a financial penalty on the first respondents,
in favour of the Secretary of State, in terms of Section 12A of the
Employment Tribunals Act 1996, as it would not be in the interests of justice
25
to do so, and so it restricts its awards to the monetary awards of
compensation payable by the first respondents to the claimant as made in
terms of this Judgment.
(4) In summary, and taking account of grossing up for tax purposes, the first
respondents are ordered to pay to the claimant, within 14 days of issue of
30
this Judgment, subject to any Recoupment Notice to be served upon them
To continue reading
Request your trial