Whistleblowing Employment Tribunal Cases
Review published whistleblowing decisions, including recent examples, claimant-success patterns, compensation signals, and respondents that recur in the current dataset.
Visible cases
634
Claimant success rate
19.0%
Cases with compensation
37
Highest visible award
£59,356
How to read this page
Users searching whistleblowing tribunal cases usually want recent published examples, likely outcomes, and comparable employers.
Whistleblowing cases can be legally complex and often overlap with detriment, dismissal, or discrimination allegations, so the dataset is best used as a corpus of comparable decisions rather than a simple checklist.
The figures here are based on published judgments currently visible in Tribunal Intel, not every claim filed in the employment tribunal system.
Common patterns in successful whistleblowing cases
These patterns are drawn from recent whistleblowing decisions where the claimant succeeded or partly succeeded and a monetary award is visible. They highlight the issues that appear most in awarded wins, not every protected disclosure claim.
Detriment for making a disclosure
4 recentCases where the claimant suffered a detriment — demotion, disciplinary action, marginalisation, or changed terms — because they made a protected disclosure.
6010960/2024
Automatic unfair dismissal
3 recentCases where dismissal was found to be automatically unfair because the reason (or principal reason) was the claimant's protected disclosure, with no qualifying period required.
6022322/2025
What counted as a protected disclosure
2 recentCases where the tribunal considered whether the worker's communication met the legal test — a qualifying disclosure in the reasonable belief it was in the public interest.
1811237/2024
Causation disputes
Cases where the employer accepted a disclosure was made but argued it did not influence the dismissal or detriment — often the central factual battleground.
Examples where whistleblowing claims succeeded
6010960/2024
Mr L Thompson v Cepac Ltd and Page Outsourcing UK Ltd: 6010960/2024
Award
£20,000
The claimant brought a discrimination claim alleging the first respondent failed to invite him to interview because of his disability. The tribunal found the claimant's conduct of proceedings to be unreasonable, scandalous and vexatious, including repeated non-attendance at hearings, excessive correspondence, and failure to comply with orders for medical evidence. The claim was struck out and the claimant ordered to pay £20,000 in costs to the first respondent.
1811237/2024
Miss C O'Connor v Safe Haven Adolescent Care Group Ltd: 1811237/2024
Award
£56,621
The claimant's complaint of unfair dismissal was upheld, and the tribunal found that the claimant's complaint of failure to make reasonable adjustments also succeeded. However, the complaints relating to detriment for making a protected disclosure, victimisation, harassment, and unlawful deduction from wages were dismissed. The tribunal awarded a total of £56,621.45 comprising a basic award of £1,929, compensatory award of £42,230, injury to feelings of £11,000, and interest of £1,462.
6022322/2025
Ms A F Ngola v Meraki Aesthetics Ltd: 6022322/2025
Award
£56
The claimant brought claims for unfair dismissal (including automatic unfair dismissal for protected disclosure), breach of contract regarding notice pay, and unlawful wage deduction. The complaint of unauthorised wage deduction was withdrawn on settlement. The tribunal found the complaint of breach of contract in relation to notice pay to be well-founded.
6013012/2024
AMS v Scot Group Ltd: 6013012/2024
Award
£23
The claimant brought claims for wrongful dismissal, whistleblowing detriment, automatically unfair dismissal, disability discrimination, and breach of contract, all of which were dismissed as not well-founded. The tribunal found the claimant's claim for unlawful deduction of wages well-founded regarding unpaid accrued holiday pay, awarding £23.33. A breach of contract claim was found well-founded but caused no loss, resulting in no compensation.
1401258/2025
Mr D McCormick v Beachside Leisure Holidays Ltd: 1401258/2025
Award
£2,909
Mr D McCormick, employed as a Head Chef from November 2023, claimed unlawful deduction from wages and breach of contract for failure to pay overtime. The tribunal found the claimant's claim well founded and ordered the respondent to pay £2,908.50 for 144.63 hours of overtime at £20.11 per hour, based on Planday system records showing hours worked in excess of the contracted 1740 annual hours.
1306427/2023
Miss S Bennison v BTL Industries Ltd: 1306427/2023 and 3301438/2024
Award
£2,537
The claimant's claim partially succeeds - she is awarded compensation for 3.5 days' worth of accrued but untaken annual leave. The rest of her claims, including unfair dismissal, whistleblowing, and unlawful deductions, are dismissed.
Recent decisions
[2026] EAT 66
Mr R Tedd v Surrey County Council: [2026] EAT 66
6010960/2024
Mr L Thompson v Cepac Ltd and Page Outsourcing UK Ltd: 6010960/2024
Award
£20,000
[2026] EAT 58
Mr L Tarbuc v Martello Piling Ltd: [2026] EAT 58
6009700/2024
Mr B Williams v Mitchell’s And Butlers: 6009700/2024
[2026] EAT 62
Mr A Ikeji v 1) Westminster City Council 2) Ms V Piquet: [2026] EAT 62
2301006/2023
Ms Turner and others v National Crime Agency: 2301006/2023 and others
6018483/2024
Mr E Shaju v Vishal and Others: 6018483/2024 and 6012138/2025
6041801/2025
S Simina v Ann Summers Ltd: 6041801/2025
Compensation profile
No confident compensation distribution is available yet for this claim type.
Recent award examples
Employers in this dataset view
Outcome mix
Related paths
Co-occurring claim types
No related claim-type mix is available yet.