Browse recent Employment Tribunal decisions heard at London South.
£462,404.18 combined
Published decisions
Newest decisions first
Employer: P and J Dust Extraction Ltd
The claim was dismissed as not well founded, meaning the claimant failed to establish the merits of the case.
Reference: 6003848/2026
Employer: Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd
All of the claimant's complaints were dismissed at the final merits hearing on 1-4 September 2026.
Reference: 6016961/2024
Employer: EvergreeenKent Ltd
The claimant was unfairly dismissed for asserting a statutory right under the Working Time Regulations 1998, but no compensation was awarded.
Reference: 6014434/2025
Employer: Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis
The tribunal dismissed the direct race discrimination claim in its entirety, finding that the claimant had not established primary facts from which an inference of race discrimination could be drawn and that the respondent's actions were based on genuine performance and progression concerns.
Reference: 6020211/2024
Employer: Secretary of State for Justice and N Hollihead
The Tribunal found no discrimination or harassment as a matter of law, and the wage deductions were authorised by the claimant's contract, so all claims were dismissed on the merits.
Reference: 6004827/2024
Employer: BUF Architecture Ltd
The tribunal found that the respondent made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £1,283.06 gross.
Reference: 6003475/2025
Employer: D&D Management Ltd
The claimant succeeded on the ordinary unfair dismissal claim but lost on all other claims, and no compensation was awarded because the claimant withdrew the remedy application.
Reference: 6021132/2025
Employer: Secretary of State for Justice
The unfair dismissal claim was struck out because the claimant had less than two years' service, and the discrimination claims were allowed to proceed after time limit extension.
Reference: 2300124/2025
Employer: Compass Group, UK and Ireland
The claimant's claim of direct age discrimination was not well-founded and was dismissed.
Reference: 6002459/2024
Employer: Surrey and Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust
The claimant's unfair dismissal claim was dismissed, but his claim for unauthorised deductions from wages succeeded regarding work on 7th November 2024.
Reference: 6024134/2025
Employer: Haberdashers’ Aske’s Federation Trust
All complaints of direct race discrimination, harassment and victimisation were dismissed as not well-founded after a full merits hearing.
Reference: 2303059/2023
Employer: St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
The claim failed because the Band 8d job evaluation outcome did not create a contractual entitlement: the requisite signatories (line manager, budget holder and DDO) did not approve the form, so there was no valid contractual variation.
Reference: 6037829/2025
Employer: ISO Energy Ltd (In Administration)
The claimants' complaint of failure to consult succeeded, and a protective award of 90 days' remuneration was ordered.
Reference: 2303721/2025
Employer: Dental Rooms Group Ltd
The claimant succeeded on three victimisation claims but failed on other discrimination, harassment, and most wage deduction claims, with no monetary award made at this liability stage.
Reference: 2302173/2023
Employer: Trustees of St Joseph's Specialist Trust
All claims were either withdrawn by the claimant or dismissed on their merits or for being presented outside the applicable time limits.
Reference: 2305778/2024
Employer: Bombardier Services (UK) Ltd
The respondent did not make an unauthorised deduction because the claimant was on sick leave and not available for work, so he was properly paid sick pay rather than full wages.
Reference: 2300513/2026
Employer: Wagco Ltd (in voluntary liquidation)
The respondent made unlawful deductions from wages by failing to pay wages for three months, and the outstanding balance after Insolvency Service payment is ordered to be paid.
Reference: 6010013/2026
Employer: M.i. Media Services Ltd and Others
The claim against the fourth respondent was struck out because it had no reasonable prospect of success, as the alleged causal connection between the protected disclosures and Mr Kyffin's role in the internal appeal was tenuous and inadequately pleaded.
Reference: 2303690/2024
Employer: Reed Talent Solutions Ltd and London Fire Commissioner
All claims were dismissed as out of time, lacking jurisdiction, or having no reasonable prospects of success.
Reference: 6021196/2024
Employer: Maximus UK Services Ltd
All claims were dismissed by the Employment Tribunal.
Reference: 6007854/2024
Employer: The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
Both complaints of indirect disability discrimination and failure to make reasonable adjustments were dismissed as not well-founded.
Reference: 6012971/2024
Employer: SE Trains Ltd
The claimant resigned voluntarily and was not dismissed by the respondent; the resignation was a consensual decision to avoid a potential capability dismissal.
Reference: 6007709/2024
Employer: Elite Hair Lounge Ltd
The claimant succeeded in her automatic unfair dismissal claim and in some, but not all, of her discrimination claims; some claims were withdrawn earlier.
Reference: 6004451/2024
Employer: Mitie Care and Custody Ltd
The overall verdict is split because Mr Lehan's unfair dismissal claim was dismissed and his wrongful dismissal/holiday pay claims were withdrawn, while Mr Maynard's unfair dismissal claim succeeded.
Reference: 2302214/2022
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.