Case 2303312/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Southern Housing — 2023
- Case reference
- 2303312/2022
- Decision date
- 4 April 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cheetham QC
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningSarah Sales brought claims against Southern Housing for unfair dismissal and unauthorised deduction of wages. The respondent was represented by counsel; the claimant appeared in person. The hearing was before Employment Judge Cheetham QC and the judgment records that reasons would not be provided unless requested under the normal rules for oral judgments.
The Tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal complaint because it did not have jurisdiction to hear the claim under section 111(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The judgment does not record any substantive finding on the merits of dismissal; the claim failed on jurisdiction.
The claim for unauthorised deduction of wages was dismissed upon withdrawal. No monetary award or remedy was recorded in the written judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed because the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear the claim pursuant to Employment Rights Act 1996 s.111(2). | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim for unauthorised deduction of wages was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Rights Act 1996 s.111(2)
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.