Case 2304340/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Christopher Jenkins v Step Ahead Social Enterprise Community Interest Company — 2025
- Case reference
- 2304340/2024
- Decision date
- 8 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge N Wilson Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Christopher Jenkins
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard by Employment Judge N Wilson at London South by video on 7 and 8 August 2025. The respondent's name was amended by consent to Step Ahead Social Enterprise Community Interest Company.
The claimant's complaint of wrongful dismissal, presented as a notice pay claim, was found not well founded and dismissed. The tribunal also dismissed the unfair dismissal complaint, but that dismissal was on jurisdictional grounds rather than after a merits finding: the tribunal held that it had no jurisdiction because the claimant did not have the qualifying length of service.
The respondent's counterclaim was also found not well founded and dismissed. The judgment records no award of compensation or other monetary remedy.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | Claimant's complaint of wrongful dismissal (notice pay) was found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed because the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear it; the claimant did not have the qualifying length of service. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Respondent's counterclaim was not well founded and 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.