Case 6029549/2025 · Employment Tribunal

Mr Christopher Leeson v Sirius Childcare Ltd — 2026

Case reference: 6029549/2025
Decision date: 3 July 2026
Jurisdiction: England & Wales

Indexed: 22 July 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr Christopher Leeson

Respondent

Sirius Childcare Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The Tribunal struck out Mr Christopher Leeson's unfair dismissal claim as having no reasonable prospect of success. He was employed by Sirius Childcare Ltd from 2 February 2025 to 27 May 2025 and had not completed the two years' service required by Section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 to pursue the claim.

The Tribunal also struck out the Section 47B ERA public interest disclosure detriment claim. Mr Leeson admitted that the disclosure relied upon as an alleged qualifying protected disclosure was made in September 2024, before his employment commenced. His Section 13 ERA claim for unlawful withholding or deduction from salary was struck out because payslips covering his entire employment showed no withholding or deduction from sums earned.

Each of those claims was struck out under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024 as having no reasonable prospect of success. The judgment contains no monetary award. A direct disability discrimination claim remains to be determined and is subject to a further preliminary hearing and separate case management orders concerning medical evidence.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	Struck out under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024 as having no reasonable prospect of success.	Struck out	—	—
Whistleblowing	The Section 47B ERA public interest disclosure detriment claim was struck out under Rule 38 as having no reasonable prospect of success.	Struck out	—	—
Unlawful deduction from wages	The Section 13 ERA salary claim was struck out under Rule 38 as having no reasonable prospect of success.	Struck out	—	—

Legal tests applied

2 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.

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.