Protective Award
The employer failed to consult collectively before making 20+ employees redundant, so a protective award of 90 days was granted.
Reference: 2300884/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Browse recent Employment Tribunal decisions heard at Croydon.
£196,392.12 combined
Published decisions
Newest decisions first
The employer failed to consult collectively before making 20+ employees redundant, so a protective award of 90 days was granted.
Reference: 2300884/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Clarigo Logistics Ltd
The claimant's unfair dismissal claim was upheld because the respondent did not attend and the tribunal found the dismissal was unfair, awarding compensation for loss of earnings, notice pay, and holiday pay.
Reference: 6007488 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Springbank Contractors Ltd
The claimant was unfairly dismissed as the respondent failed to show a fair reason for dismissal and the claimant was found to be an employee.
Reference: 6005822/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Chance Further Supported Living
The claimant was found not to be an employee, so the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction and dismissed the claim.
Reference: 6007017/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Coveo Solutions (UK) Ltd and Coveo EMEA Ltd (formerly Qubit Digital Ltd)
The Claimant succeeded in claims of discrimination and unfair dismissal against the Second Respondent, resulting in a total compensation award of £116,483.38.
Reference: 2303416/2024 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: ONMT Ltd
The complaint of unfair dismissal was well-founded, and the respondent was ordered to pay a total of £12,839.95 including a 20% uplift for non-compliance with the ACAS Code.
Reference: 6008241/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Holiday Extras Ltd
The respondent failed to provide several reasonable adjustments for the claimant's disability, but some allegations of failure were dismissed.
Reference: 6012387/2024 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Global Partners BD Ltd (T/a Wok and Fire)
The claimant succeeded on unfair dismissal and holiday pay claims but lost on unauthorised deduction from wages.
Reference: 6036496/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Nightingale Hammerson Trustee Company Ltd and Others
All complaints were dismissed as not well-founded after a full merits hearing.
Reference: 2304791/2022 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Da’aro Youth Project
All complaints were dismissed because the tribunal found no unlawful discrimination, harassment, victimisation, or constructive dismissal; the claimant failed to establish the alleged breaches or detrimental treatment.
Reference: 6003889/2024 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Innovate Energy Solutions Ltd
The claimant won on breach of contract but lost on the claim for unauthorised deduction from wages.
Reference: 6022866/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: CBRE Managed Services Ltd
The claims were dismissed because there was no breach of the implied duty of trust and confidence for constructive dismissal and the wage reduction was due to the claimant having used up her sick pay entitlement.
Reference: 6042051/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
The claim was struck out because it had no reasonable prospect of success, as there was no legal entitlement to overtime pay under the express terms of the contract or any applicable policy.
Reference: 2306421/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: University of Greenwich
The claimant failed to provide sufficient evidence that her ADHD had a substantial (more than minor or trivial) adverse effect on her day-to-day activities, so the disability test was not met.
Reference: 6013924/2024 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Skilled Careers Ltd and Sapphire Accounting Ltd
The claim was dismissed because it was brought against the wrong legal entities and the claimant failed to comply with a Tribunal order.
Reference: 6045241/2025 (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.