Browse recent Employment Tribunal decisions involving Serco Ltd.
£7,423.68 combined
Published decisions
Newest decisions first
Heard at Reading
The tribunal found that the dismissal was fair (based on ill-health capability and conducted reasonably) and that there was no unfavourable treatment or failure to make reasonable adjustments relating to the claimant's disability.
Reference: 6010566/2024 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Heard at Manchester
The claimant was unfairly dismissed, but compensation was reduced due to a 75% contributory fault deduction and a 25% ACAS uplift, with a Polkey reduction of 80% applied to the compensatory award.
Reference: 2403227/2024 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Heard at Leeds
The claim was dismissed because the claimant failed to attend or otherwise pursue the case and, on its face, lacked the qualifying service and any race‑related basis for dismissal.
Reference: 6002152/2023 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Heard at Bury St Edmunds
The unfair dismissal claim was struck out for lack of jurisdiction and the unlawful‑deduction claim was struck out (with a £50 deposit order) for insufficient particulars, while the race‑discrimination claims were left to continue.
Reference: 3302912/2024 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Heard at London South
The Tribunal found Serco had breached its statutory duty to consult the recognised union under section 145B when it implemented the 2023 pay increase, so the claimants’ breach of duty claim was upheld.
Reference: 2305280/2023 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Search the full case database by keywords, case details, similar facts and compensation awarded.
Case details come from published tribunal decisions. Always check the official decision before relying on a result.