Constructive Unfair Dismissal
Employer: Fortnum and Mason plc
All claims were dismissed as not well-founded after a full merits hearing.
Reference: 3302461/2024 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Browse recent Employment Tribunal decisions heard at Reading.
£2,865.20 combined
Published decisions
Newest decisions first
Employer: Fortnum and Mason plc
All claims were dismissed as not well-founded after a full merits hearing.
Reference: 3302461/2024 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Virgin Media O2 UK Ltd
The claim relating to protected disclosures was struck out at a preliminary hearing.
Reference: 6014937/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: City Gate Community Projects and Fareshare Sussex and Surrey
The claimant's claims other than a specific claim (para 5.1.3) were struck out, and the remaining claim was found to be within the tribunal's jurisdiction.
Reference: 6015777/2024 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: P N Daly Ltd
Both claims were dismissed as not well-founded.
Reference: 6008825/2024 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Alvarius Pharmaceuticals Ltd
The respondent made unauthorised deductions from wages, failed to pay contractual notice pay, and failed to pay accrued holiday pay, resulting in successful claims on those grounds but dismissal of other claims.
Reference: 6016023/2024 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: ACS Group Service Ltd
The respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages in August 2024.
Reference: 6000432/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Coalo Ltd
The claimant succeeded in part on claims of failure to make reasonable adjustments and discrimination arising from disability, but failed on direct disability discrimination and harassment claims.
Reference: 6014734/2024 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: West Hertfordshire Teaching Hospital NHS Trust
The claim was dismissed because the claimant failed to attend the hearing without providing any explanation.
Reference: 6007446/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Compass Group UK and Ireland Ltd
The claimant was unfairly dismissed because the respondent's investigation and disciplinary process were procedurally flawed, but the award is reduced by 80% for the chance of a fair dismissal and 60% for contributory conduct, with remedy to be determined at a later hearing.
Reference: 6017884/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Edmundson Electrical Ltd
The Employment Judge refused the respondent's application to strike out the claim, finding that there were central factual disputes and the claimant's case was not conclusively disproved by documents, so it should proceed to a full hearing.
Reference: 6023860/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Reference: 3313506/2023 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Alser (UK) Ltd
The respondent made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's pay and must repay the amounts withheld.
Reference: 6027008/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Windsor Telecom Ltd
The complaint of unfair dismissal failed and was dismissed by the Employment Tribunal.
Reference: 6028790/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Surrey Security Systems Ltd
The complaint of unfair dismissal was not well-founded and was dismissed; the unlawful deductions claim was withdrawn.
Reference: 6013956/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: LHR Airports Ltd
The Tribunal found that all claims of direct discrimination, harassment, and victimisation were not well-founded and therefore failed.
Reference: 3300526/2024 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: British Gas Services Ltd
The Tribunal found that the claimant's complaints of unfair dismissal, breach of contract, and disability discrimination were not well-founded and were dismissed.
Reference: 3306015/2024 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Southern Electric Power Distribution plc
The complaint of unfair dismissal failed and was dismissed by Employment Judge Hawksworth.
Reference: 3304539/2024 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Serco Ltd
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)
Employer: Avenir Group Ltd
The claim for unpaid wages and holiday pay was dismissed because it was presented late and it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have filed it within the time limit.
Reference: 6015408/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Our Lady’s Abingdon Trustees Ltd (in voluntary liquidation)
The complaint was dismissed because it was not presented within the applicable time limit and it was reasonably practicable to do so.
Reference: 6003132/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Home Office
The complaints of disability discrimination were dismissed.
Reference: 3311177/2023 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Warrens Warehouse & Distribution (Midlands) Ltd
The claim was dismissed because the claimant failed to attend the preliminary hearing and did not provide a sufficient basis for her amendment or any explanation for her absence.
Reference: 3314766/2023 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Oxfordshire County Council and S Tomlin
The claimant succeeded in his claim that he was subjected to unlawful detriments via negative references due to protected disclosures, but his other claims were dismissed.
Reference: 3301251/2024 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: John Lewis plc
Both complaints were dismissed as not well-founded after the tribunal heard the evidence.
Reference: 6011319/2025 (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.