Ms N Burgess v ActionAid — 2025

Case reference: 6005723/2024
Decision date: 13 February 2025
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Keogh Appearances
Venue: London Central

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Ms N Burgess

Respondent

ActionAid

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal heard the case at London Central Employment Tribunal by CVP on 21 January 2024 before Employment Judge Keogh. The judgment, sent to the parties on 13 February 2025, records a single outcome: the claim was struck out because it was out of time.

No merits findings are set out in the decision, and no remedy was awarded. The judgment does not provide any further reasoning beyond the out-of-time strike out.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Breach of contract	The judgment does not distinguish claim types in the reasons; it states only that the claim was struck out because it was out of time. This claim type is taken from the GOV.UK jurisdiction code.	Struck out	—	—
Whistleblowing	The judgment does not distinguish claim types in the reasons; it states only that the claim was struck out because it was out of time. This claim type is taken from the GOV.UK jurisdiction code for public interest disclosure.	Struck out	—	—
Unfair dismissal	The judgment does not distinguish claim types in the reasons; it states only that the claim was struck out because it was out of time. This claim type is taken from the GOV.UK jurisdiction code.	Struck out	—	—

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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.