Case 2219151/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms E. Dakers v The Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue & Customs — 2025
- Case reference
- 2219151/2023
- Decision date
- 3 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge G. King Representation
- Venue
- London Central ET
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms E. Dakers
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at London Central Employment Tribunal before Employment Judge G. King, heard the case on 29, 30 September and 1, 2 and 3 October 2025. In the judgment sent to the parties on 4 November 2025, the tribunal held that Ms E. Dakers's claim of constructive unfair dismissal was well founded and succeeded against The Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs.
No remedy was determined in this judgment. The tribunal directed that there would be a separate remedy hearing, listed for a date to be notified to the parties with a one-day time estimate, and encouraged the parties to work together to agree the appropriate remedy in advance. If the remedy is agreed, the parties are to notify the tribunal that the hearing is no longer required.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment states that the Claimant's claim of constructive unfair dismissal is well founded and succeeds. A separate remedy hearing was directed. | Upheld | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.