Case 6019598/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss C Kissane v Mitie Ltd Heard at Leeds — 2025
- Case reference
- 6019598/2024
- Decision date
- 27 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brain REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss C Kissane
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss C Kissane brought two complaints against Mitie Ltd arising from the respondent’s failure to pay an enhanced redundancy payment. The first was a breach of contract claim. The second was a discrimination complaint brought under sections 13 and 39(2)(d) of the Equality Act 2010; the extracted text does not identify the protected characteristic relied on. The case was heard in Leeds on 26 and 27 November 2025 before Employment Judge Brain.
The tribunal held that neither complaint was well founded and dismissed both. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested by a party.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Claim that the respondent was in breach of contract by not paying an enhanced redundancy payment; the tribunal found it was not well founded and dismissed it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Claim brought pursuant to sections 13 and 39(2)(d) of the Equality Act 2010 alleging discrimination by not paying an enhanced redundancy payment; the extracted text does not specify the protected characteristic. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.