Case 2302593/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Y v Evolve Housing + Support — 2025
- Case reference
- 2302593/2024
- Decision date
- 20 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tsamados
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Y
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs Y brought complaints of ordinary unfair dismissal and automatic unfair dismissal for making a protected disclosure against Evolve Housing + Support. Employment Judge Tsamados sat alone at London South and gave judgment on 17 January 2025, with the written record sent on 20 January 2025.
The tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the ordinary unfair dismissal complaint because the claimant had less than two years' continuous qualifying employment. That complaint was therefore dismissed.
The tribunal also held that the complaint of automatic unfair dismissal for making a protected disclosure was not well founded. That complaint was dismissed. No monetary award was recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the ordinary unfair dismissal complaint because the claimant had less than two years' continuous qualifying employment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The complaint of automatic unfair dismissal for making a protected disclosure was found not well founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.