The answer to this question lies - IMHO - in whether the flight paths are expected to cross. In the scenario as painted by the thread starter, no - therefore HD is correct. For an opposite direction go-around (as opposed to a landing) then clearly the flight paths will cross, there is the possibility of a VW encounter, and hence the requirement for VW separation to be applied. But, as a footnote, I find this section of MATS 1 to be badly written; I have come across a number of scenarios where departure VW is definitely an issue but which are NOT covered by the Holy Word. Therefore I return to the "are you certain that the flight paths will not cross?" point as the ultimate arbiter. If you cannot answer in the affirmative, then SOMETHING needs to be applied. Duty of care blah blah... And doubtless one needs to be able to justify that decision to the prosecution lawyer. "It's not in the book" is no defence and you'll see the writers of said book disappearing fast over the horizon.
Respectfully and humbly offered....
LISSART