WorkDisputes Logo

London South Employment Tribunal cases

Browse recent Employment Tribunal decisions heard at London South.

Recent cases
76
Employers (last 3 months)
75
Recorded awards (last 3 months)
17

£518,121.77 combined

Published decisions

Cases from the last three months

Newest decisions first

17 Jul 2026
Mixed outcome

Unfair Dismissal

Employer: The Pension Regulator

The claimant won on ordinary unfair dismissal due to unreasonable investigation and procedural flaws, but lost on automatic unfair dismissal because the alleged disclosures were not protected and were not the reason for dismissal.

Legal Issues (7)
  • Protected disclosures (whistleblowing)
  • automatic unfair dismissal
  • ordinary unfair dismissal
  • reasonableness of investigation
  • procedural fairness
  • definition of UPSI
  • employer's band of reasonable responses.

Reference: 2301825/2024

(View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
17 Jul 2026
Dismissed on jurisdiction

Unfair Dismissal, Discrimination, Unpaid Wages and Harassment

Employer: Pret A Manger (Europe) Ltd

The claims were presented outside the applicable statutory time limits and no extension was granted, and the claimant lacked sufficient service for an unfair dismissal claim.

Legal Issues (4)
  • Jurisdiction and time limits under Employment Rights Act 1996 and Equality Act 2010
  • whether it was reasonably practicable to present claims in time
  • whether it is just and equitable to extend time
  • also requirement of two years' continuous service for unfair dismissal.

Reference: 2313872/2024

(View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
16 Jul 2026
Claim dismissed

Unfair Dismissal, Breach of Contract and Other

Employer: Transport for London

The claimant was not an employee of the respondent, so the unfair dismissal claim was dismissed and the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction for the other claims.

Legal Issues (2)
  • Employee status
  • jurisdiction for breach of contract claims under the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction Order 1994

Reference: 2301731/2025

(View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
15 Jul 2026
Mixed outcome

Unfair Dismissal and Discrimination

Employer: London Ambulance Service NHS Trust

The unfair dismissal claim was struck out due to lack of qualifying service, but the disability discrimination claims were allowed to proceed.

Legal Issues (4)
  • Section 108 Employment Rights Act 1996 – two-year qualifying period for unfair dismissal
  • disability discrimination under Equality Act 2010
  • extension of time for late presentation
  • amendment of claim.

Reference: 6002895/2025

(View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
13 Jul 2026
Claim struck out

Unfair Dismissal, Constructive Dismissal, Discrimination and Unpaid Wages

Employer: Lidl Ltd

The claimant's disability discrimination claim was dismissed/struck out because he was found not to be disabled, and his reconsideration application was refused.

Legal Issues (5)
  • Whether the claimant was disabled under section 6 Equality Act 2010
  • substantial adverse effect and long-term duration tests
  • recurring/fluctuating conditions
  • the standard for reconsideration under rules 70-71 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2024
  • procedural fairness at a preliminary hearing.

Reference: 6009818/2024

(View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
10 Jul 2026
Claim dismissed

Redundancy Pay and Unpaid Wages

Employer: Sixmen Ltd (in voluntary liquidation) and The Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

The claimant was not an employee of Sixmen Limited at the material time, so her claims for redundancy pay and holiday pay were dismissed.

Legal Issues (7)
  • Whether the claimant was an 'employee' under section 230(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996
  • applying the tests of control
  • mutuality of obligation
  • and personal performance from Ready Mixed Concrete and Autoclenz. The tribunal found she lacked the necessary elements of a contract of service
  • as she exercised sole control
  • had no defined hours or supervision
  • and her remuneration was structured as a director's salary.

Reference: 6004854/2026

(View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
10 Jul 2026
Claim dismissed

Unfair Dismissal and Constructive Dismissal

Employer: Southwark Council

The claimant's claim of constructive unfair dismissal failed and was dismissed.

Legal Issues (1)
  • Constructive unfair dismissal – whether the claimant was entitled to resign in response to a fundamental breach of contract by the employer.

Reference: 6009737/2025

(View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
9 Jul 2026
Mixed outcome£286.14 awarded

Unfair Dismissal, Discrimination, Unpaid Wages, Breach of Contract and Harassment

Employer: Topaz Ltd

The claimant lost on all claims except for unlawful deductions from wages and failure to provide a written statement, for which she was awarded a total of £1,268.94.

Legal Issues (6)
  • Automatic unfair dismissal
  • direct race discrimination
  • harassment related to race and sex
  • breach of contract (bonus)
  • unlawful deductions from wages
  • failure to provide written statement of employment particulars.

Reference: 2301649/2024

(View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
9 Jul 2026
Mixed outcome£273,108.75 awarded

Unfair Dismissal and Unpaid Wages

Employer: Native Land Ltd

The claimant won on liability (unfair dismissal and wages) by default after the respondent's response was struck out, but the remedy judgment and costs order were set aside on reconsideration, so the final remedy is not yet determined.

Legal Issues (4)
  • Strike-out for non-compliance with Tribunal orders
  • reconsideration of remedy judgment due to solicitor's failure to notify client of hearing
  • application of Phipps v Priory Education Services Ltd and Outasight VB Ltd v Brown
  • whether party had fair opportunity to participate.

Reference: 6022779/2024

(View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
9 Jul 2026
Claim dismissed

Unfair Dismissal, Discrimination and Whistleblowing

Employer: Kingston University Service Company Ltd

The claimant failed to establish that his tinnitus and anxiety had a substantial adverse effect on his day-to-day activities, so he was not a disabled person under the Equality Act 2010, and his amendment applications were either withdrawn or refused.

Legal Issues (3)
  • Whether the claimant was a disabled person under section 6 Equality Act 2010
  • whether to grant amendment applications
  • strike out application (dealt with separately).

Reference: 6005329/2024

(View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
8 Jul 2026
Claim struck out

Unfair Dismissal, Discrimination, Unpaid Wages and Whistleblowing

Employer: Mr N W Humphrey (Acting by his Deputy Ms S Morris)

The claim was struck out because the claimant's conduct and inability to participate made a fair hearing within the trial window impossible, and a further postponement would cause disproportionate prejudice to the respondent.

Legal Issues (5)
  • Strike out under Rule 38(1)(e) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 – no longer possible to have a fair hearing within the trial window
  • balancing prejudice
  • proportionality
  • previous postponements
  • claimant's lack of engagement and failure to attend properly.

Reference: 2303460/2022

(View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
7 Jul 2026
Mixed outcome£15,540.78 awarded

Constructive Dismissal, Unpaid Wages, Breach of Contract and Other

Employer: Richmond Food & Supply Ltd and Others

The claimant succeeded against the employer on unpaid wages, holiday pay, notice pay and pension contributions, but the claims against the individual respondents were struck out as they were not the employer.

Legal Issues (9)
  • Formation of employment contract
  • employee/worker status
  • unauthorised deductions
  • constructive dismissal
  • notice period
  • holiday pay calculation
  • ACAS Code uplift
  • written statement of particulars
  • individual liability for employment claims.

Reference: 6040979/2025

(View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
3 Jul 2026
Mixed outcome£4,024.15 awarded

Unfair Dismissal and Breach of Contract

Employer: Harrods Ltd

The wrongful dismissal claim succeeded because four weeks of notice pay remained unpaid, while the unfair dismissal claim was dismissed because Harrods had a genuine belief in misconduct following a reasonable investigation and dismissal fell within the range of reasonable responses.

Legal Issues (5)
  • Wrongful dismissal (breach of contract – notice pay)
  • unfair dismissal under s.98 ERA 1996 (conduct reason
  • Burchell test
  • range of reasonable responses
  • procedural fairness).

Reference: 6005182/2025

(View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
2 Jul 2026
Claimant won£45,336.23 awarded

Unpaid Wages and Breach of Contract

Employer: Kosy Living Ltd

The Respondent failed to present a valid response, resulting in a default judgment where the Tribunal upheld the Claimant's claims for unpaid wages, bonus, consequential losses, and notice pay.

Legal Issues (4)
  • Unauthorised deductions from wages (s.13 ERA 1996)
  • breach of contract (notice)
  • consequential loss (s.24(2) ERA 1996)
  • default judgment (Rule 22).

Reference: 2300689/2026

(View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
1 Jul 2026
Claimant won£14,537.53 awarded

Unfair Dismissal, Discrimination and Breach of Contract

Employer: APX Estate Agents Ltd

The claimant's complaints of unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, and maternity discrimination succeeded because the respondent failed to attend the hearing and provided no evidence to rebut the claimant's unchallenged account that she was dismissed without notice due to her pregnancy/maternity leave.

Legal Issues (4)
  • Automatic unfair dismissal for a reason relating to pregnancy/maternity (s.99 Employment Rights Act 1996)
  • wrongful dismissal (dismissal without notice)
  • unfavourable treatment because of pregnancy/maternity leave (s.18 Equality Act 2010). The respondent failed to attend the hearing
  • leading to a default judgment.

Reference: 6009619/2024

(View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
29 Jun 2026
Claim dismissed

Unpaid Wages, Breach of Contract and Other

Employer: People’s Partnership Ltd and NASA Umbrella Ltd

The tribunal dismissed all claims because the claimant was not employed by the first respondent, remained employed by the second respondent, and received the contractual notice pay, so no breach of contract or wrongful dismissal occurred.

Legal Issues (6)
  • Whether the termination of the assignment constituted wrongful dismissal or breach of contract. The tribunal held that (1) the first respondent was not the claimant's employer
  • (2) the claimant remained employed by the second respondent
  • so no dismissal had occurred
  • and (3) the first respondent was contractually entitled to end the assignment with one month's notice
  • which was paid. Consequently
  • all claims failed.

Reference: 6008020/2026

(View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Pro case research

Need more cases or more precise results?

Search the full case database by keywords, case details, similar facts and compensation awarded.

Open Pro Case Search

Case details come from published tribunal decisions. Always check the official decision before relying on a result.