Case 1603967/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Ms J Constable v Carers Trust Crossroads West Wales — 2026
- Case reference
- 1603967/2025
- Decision date
- 2 April 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Harfield REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms J Constable
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a video hearing in Cardiff on 24 March 2026, Employment Judge R Harfield considered Ms J Constable's application for interim relief in a protected disclosure dismissal complaint against Carers Trust Crossroads West Wales. The judgment says the decision was based on a summary, predictive assessment on the limited information then available, and that no findings were made about the substance of the case.
The tribunal held that it was not likely that, at the final hearing, it would find that the reason or principal reason for dismissal was that Ms Constable made a protected disclosure or disclosures, so the application for interim relief was refused. The judgment records that the protected disclosure dismissal complaint can continue through the employment tribunal process in the ordinary way, and that the other complaints brought by Ms Constable were rejected because she had not undertaken Acas early conciliation.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | Interim relief application only. The tribunal refused interim relief on the basis that it was not likely to find at the final hearing that the reason or principal reason for dismissal was protected disclosure; the underlying protected disclosure dismissal complaint was said to continue through the tribunal process. | Other | — | — |
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.