Case 2402547/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs M Roumpedaki v EAM Lodge CIC — 2025
- Case reference
- 2402547/2023
- Decision date
- 8 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
- Venue
- Manchester
- Panel members
- Mr A Egerton, Ms B Hillon
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs M Roumpedaki
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing in Manchester on 2-5 June 2025 before Employment Judge Phil Allen, sitting with Mr A Egerton and Ms B Hillon, the tribunal dismissed Mrs M Roumpedaki's unfair dismissal complaint as not well-founded and found that she was not unfairly dismissed. No monetary award was made.
The tribunal also dismissed the complaints of direct race discrimination, harassment related to race, and victimisation as not well-founded. Those liability findings meant that none of the claimant's substantive claims succeeded on the merits.
In addition, the tribunal held that the complaints of direct discrimination and harassment based on allegations 3, 5 and 6, so far as they related to pay before the claimant became a TNA, were not presented within the applicable time limit, including on a just and equitable basis, and were outside the tribunal's jurisdiction to consider. Those complaints were dismissed on that basis as well.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The complaint of unfair dismissal was found not well-founded; the tribunal stated that the claimant was not unfairly dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The complaints of direct race discrimination were found not well-founded. The tribunal also held that the complaints of direct discrimination relying on allegations 3, 5 and 6, to the extent they related to pay before the claimant became a TNA, were out of time and outside its jurisdiction. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | The complaints of harassment related to race were found not well-founded. The tribunal also held that the harassment complaints relying on allegations 3, 5 and 6, to the extent they related to pay before the claimant became a TNA, were out of time and outside its jurisdiction. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Victimisation | The complaints of victimisation were found not well-founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- just and equitable time limit
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.