Case 3200109/2025 · Employment Tribunal

Ms B Yavuz v Bahay Kubo Housing Association Limited — 2025

Case reference: 3200109/2025
Decision date: 29 April 2025
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Reid Representation

Indexed: 18 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Ms B Yavuz

Respondent

Bahay Kubo Housing Association Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The Tribunal found that the Claimant's unfair dismissal claim had not been presented within the time limits in s111 Employment Rights Act 1996. It was a premature claim presented before the effective date of termination and not during a notice period within s111(3) Employment Rights Act 1996, so the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear it.

As a result, the unfair dismissal claim was dismissed and the associated application for interim relief under s128(1) Employment Rights Act 1996 was also dismissed. The judgment stated that the Claimant's other claims were unaffected and that she remained in time to re-present her unfair dismissal claim.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The Tribunal found the unfair dismissal claim was not presented within the time limits in s111 Employment Rights Act 1996 and was premature, so it had no jurisdiction to hear it.	Dismissed	—	—
Other	The associated application for interim relief under s128(1) Employment Rights Act 1996 was dismissed as a consequence of the dismissal of the unfair dismissal claim.	Dismissed	—	—

Legal tests applied

3 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.