London South Employment Tribunal cases

Browse recent Employment Tribunal decisions heard at London South.

Recent cases: 86
Employers (last 3 months): 83
Recorded awards (last 3 months): 17

Published decisions

Cases from the last three months

Newest decisions first

8 Aug 2026

Claim dismissed

Unpaid Wages and Other

Employer: Recycled Streetwear Ltd

All claims dismissed because the claimant failed to prove unlawful deductions (or claims were time-barred), the respondent provided itemised pay statements, and the holiday pay claim was unparticularised.

Legal Issues (5)

Time limits for unlawful deduction of wages claims
reasonable practicability for extension
burden of proof on hours worked
requirement for itemised pay statements
particularisation of holiday pay claims

Reference: 2300261/2026

7 Aug 2026

Claim dismissed

Unfair Dismissal, Discrimination, Unpaid Wages, Whistleblowing, Harassment and Other

Employer: Bupa Care Services Ltd

The claimant's claims under Working Time Regulations were struck out for no reasonable prospects, and his religion/belief discrimination and Health and Safety claims were withdrawn, while other claims remain pending.

Legal Issues (4)

Interim relief test (pretty good chance of success)
definition of protected disclosure
strike-out for no reasonable prospects
withdrawal of claims

Reference: 2307277/2025

4 Aug 2026

Dismissed on jurisdiction

Other

Employer: Brighton and Hove City Council

The interim relief application was presented out of time, and the claimant failed to show it was not reasonably practicable to present it earlier, so the rejection was confirmed.

Legal Issues (4)

Whether the interim relief application was presented in time
application of s.128(2) ERA 1996
meaning of 'presented' (Hammond v Haigh Castle)
strict time limits and reasonable practicability (Fishley; Miller v Community Links)

Reference: 6028045/2026

3 Aug 2026

Claim dismissed

Unfair Dismissal and Whistleblowing

Employer: Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust

All three complaints were dismissed as not well-founded.

Legal Issues (3)

Whether the claimant was subjected to detriment for making a protected disclosure
whether the dismissal was automatically unfair under section 103A ERA 1996
whether the dismissal was unfair under section 98 ERA 1996

Reference: 2301943/2024

3 Aug 2026

Claim dismissed

Unpaid Wages

Employer: Kinoya Ltd

The claimant's complaints were dismissed because the employer had effectively provided payslips via a digital link (constructive giving) and the holiday pay was fully paid after termination, so no unlawful deduction remained.

Legal Issues (5)

Section 8 ERA (itemised pay statements) - meaning of 'given' (Leedham v Royal Mail)
Section 13 ERA (unauthorised deductions from wages)
application to amend (Selkent, Vaughan, Peace)
time limits
balance of hardship

Reference: 6002451/2026

3 Aug 2026

Mixed outcome

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

Employer: South Bank Colleges

The claimant succeeded in victimisation, constructive unfair dismissal, holiday pay, notice pay, and SSP claims, but failed in disability discrimination and harassment claims.

Legal Issues (7)

Disability definition under s6 Equality Act 2010
victimisation
constructive dismissal
unfair dismissal
unlawful deductions from wages
holiday pay
notice pay

Reference: 2305628/2024

31 Jul 2026

Mixed outcome

Discrimination, Unpaid Wages and Harassment

Employer: Park Avenue Healthcare Ltd

The claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments succeeded, but all other claims (direct race and disability discrimination, harassment, holiday pay) were dismissed.

Legal Issues (6)

Reasonable adjustments for disability
time limits under section 123 Equality Act 2010
just and equitable extension
direct discrimination
harassment
holiday pay

Reference: 2300820/2023

31 Jul 2026

Claim struck out

Discrimination

Employer: Splash Damage Ltd

The claims were struck out because the claimant's death made it impossible to have a fair hearing, as the respondent could not test the claimant's evidence on the central issue of disability.

Legal Issues (2)

Whether a fair hearing is possible when the claimant has died and cannot give evidence or be cross-examined on the central issue of disability
application of Rule 38(1)(e) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024

Reference: 6006844/2025

31 Jul 2026

Claim dismissed

Unfair Dismissal, Discrimination, Unpaid Wages and Breach of Contract

Employer: Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd

All claims were dismissed on the merits after a full hearing before Employment Judge Sudra.

Legal Issues (7)

The Tribunal considered the reason for dismissal (SOSR)
the fairness of the procedure
the burden of proof in discrimination claims
whether PCPs existed for reasonable adjustments
whether the claimant did protected acts and whether they caused detriment
whether PILON was a breach of contract
whether there were unauthorised deductions from wages

Reference: 2302981/2024

28 Jul 2026

Claim struck out

Unpaid Wages

Employer: Comave UK Ltd

The claim was dismissed under Rule 47 because the claimant indicated the matter had been resolved by payment and neither party attended the hearing.

Legal Issues (3)

Non-attendance of parties
dismissal under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2024
claim resolved by payment

Reference: 6047276/2025

28 Jul 2026

Claim struck out

Unfair Dismissal

Employer: New Life Balance Ltd

The claim was dismissed because the claimant failed to attend the final hearing and had not actively pursued the claim.

Legal Issues (2)

Rule 47 dismissal for non-attendance
consideration of preparation time order under Rule 74(2)(a)

Reference: 6013877/2024

28 Jul 2026

Claim struck out

Other

Employer: ISS Facility Services Ltd

The claim was struck out because it had no reasonable prospect of success and the claimant failed to comply with an Unless Order.

Legal Issues (2)

Strike out application under Rule 37(1)(a) (no reasonable prospects) and Rule 37(1)(c) (failure to comply with orders)
consequences of Unless Order non-compliance

Reference: 6000009/2026

28 Jul 2026

Claim struck out

Discrimination

Employer: King’s College London and L Sanderson

The entire claim was struck out as vexatious and an abuse of process under Rule 38(1)(a), because the claimant repeatedly re-litigated matters already decided or which could have been raised in earlier proceedings.

Legal Issues (5)

Strike out for no reasonable prospects and as vexatious
abuse of process (Henderson v Henderson)
issue estoppel
proportionality of strike out
litigant in person conduct

Reference: 2309321/2025

27 Jul 2026

Mixed outcome

Unfair Dismissal, Discrimination and Harassment

Employer: The Secretary of State for Justice

The claimant succeeded only on her harassment related to sex claim (a comment in February 2018), while all other claims were dismissed.

Legal Issues (5)

Harassment related to sex under the Equality Act 2010
ordinary unfair dismissal
direct sex discrimination
discrimination arising from disability
victimisation. The tribunal found only the harassment claim well-founded

Reference: 2302738/2024

24 Jul 2026

Claim dismissed

Discrimination

Employer: WPP 2005 Ltd

The claimant failed to prove disability, so all disability discrimination claims were dismissed; the reconsideration application was refused, confirming the original judgment.

Legal Issues (5)

Whether the claimant was a disabled person under s.6 Equality Act 2010
meaning of 'substantial adverse effect' on normal day-to-day activities
burden of proof on claimant
weight given to diagnosis and medical evidence
consideration of coping strategies and employment context

Reference: 6021899/2024

23 Jul 2026

Claim dismissed

Discrimination

Employer: Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust

The claims of direct race discrimination and victimisation were not well-founded on the merits because the redundancy process was fair, the claimant was not treated less favourably because of her race, and the decision-makers were unaware of her protected act.

Legal Issues (5)

Direct race discrimination
victimisation
redundancy selection
burden of proof
credibility of witnesses

Reference: 6007366/2024

22 Jul 2026

Mixed outcome£60,670.83 awarded

Redundancy Pay, Unpaid Wages, Breach of Contract and Other

Employer: Mashtraxx Ltd (In Voluntary Liquidation)

The claimant won on claims for wages, breach of contract (notice and expenses), redundancy, and holiday pay but lost on a separate claim for compensation for lost share options.

Legal Issues (6)

Unauthorised deductions from wages (Employment Rights Act 1996 s.13)
breach of contract for notice pay and travel expenses
statutory redundancy payment
holiday pay accrual on termination
share options not compensable on redundancy absent contractual provision
default judgment under rule 21/22

Reference: 2303639/2025

20 Jul 2026

Claim dismissed

Unfair Dismissal, Discrimination and Breach of Contract

Employer: Macmillan Cancer Support

The claimant's unfair dismissal claim was struck out for lack of service, and his claims of direct race discrimination, victimisation, and wrongful dismissal were dismissed on their merits.

Legal Issues (3)

Jurisdictional requirement of two years' service for unfair dismissal
elements of direct race discrimination and victimisation under the Equality Act 2010
wrongful dismissal for breach of contract

Reference: 2303242/2024

18 Jul 2026

Claim dismissed

Unfair Dismissal, Constructive Dismissal and Breach of Contract

Employer: Advanced New Technology Ltd

The claimant was not constructively dismissed because the employer's conduct did not amount to a fundamental breach of contract, and the claimant's resignation was not in response to any such breach.

Legal Issues (3)

Constructive dismissal – whether employer's conduct amounted to a fundamental breach of the implied term of trust and confidence
requirement for employee to resign in response to the breach
affirmation of contract

Reference: 6003140/2025

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

17 Jul 2026

Claim dismissed

Unfair Dismissal and Whistleblowing

Employer: Brighton And Hove City Council

placeholder

Legal Issues (6)

Protected disclosure qualifying disclosure and causation
reason for dismissal
Burchell test for misconduct dismissals
reasonable investigation and fair procedure
range of reasonable responses
fairness of sanction

Reference: 2303781/2024

17 Jul 2026

Mixed outcome£4,124.18 awarded

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

Employer: Ocado Central Services Ltd

The claimant succeeded on the unfair dismissal claim but failed on all other claims, resulting in a split verdict.

Legal Issues (10)

Unfair dismissal reason and procedure
Polkey deduction
ACAS Code uplift
disability discrimination claims including direct
indirect
arising from disability
reasonable adjustments
harassment and victimisation
time limits
breach of contract for notice and holiday pay

Reference: 2305964/2024

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

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

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.