Case 6019763/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Miss A Hunter v Ethos Academy Trust — 2025
- Case reference
- 6019763/2025
- Decision date
- 31 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Bridge Representation
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss A Hunter
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought a breach of contract claim, saying that the respondent withdrew an offer of employment after it had been accepted and a contract had been formed. The preliminary hearing considered the claimant's application to strike out the part of the respondent's response concerning whether the DBS check had been completed.
The tribunal refused the application. It found that the date on the DBS certificate did not itself preclude the respondent from succeeding on that ground, because the offer letter referred to the certificate being presented to Ann Booth, School Business Manager. The tribunal stated that the strike-out test did not amount to a determination that would be made at the final hearing.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment records a breach of contract claim arising from withdrawal of an accepted offer of employment, but this preliminary hearing only refused the claimant's application to strike out part of the respondent's response concerning the DBS check. The merits of the breach of contract claim were not determined. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- S38(1)(a) Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- no reasonable prospect of success
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.