Browse recent Employment Tribunal decisions heard at Reading.
£53,782.86 combined
Published decisions
Newest decisions first
Employer: Sudbury House Ltd
Both claims were dismissed as not well-founded after the tribunal found insufficient evidence to support them.
Reference: 3303513/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: British Airways plc
The claimant's complaints of unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal were found to be well-founded, with reductions for Polkey and contributory fault, but remedy is to be determined at a later hearing.
Reference: 3311075/2024 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: EBITS LLP
The claimant's automatic unfair dismissal claim was struck out for failure to pay a deposit, and the paternity pay claim was dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success.
Reference: 3303447/2024 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Remass Ltd
Both complaints of breach of contract (notice pay and holiday pay) were dismissed as not well-founded.
Reference: 6021323/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: The Co-operative Group Ltd
All claims were dismissed either because the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction (claims presented out of time) or because the disability discrimination complaints were found not well-founded.
Reference: 6016213/2024 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Caretree Ltd
The claimant's claim for unfair dismissal was dismissed as not well founded, but she succeeded on her claim for unlawful deduction from wages.
Reference: 3300511/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Wilson James Ltd
All claims were dismissed as not well-founded.
Reference: 3305688/2022 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Slough Borough Council
The Tribunal set aside the previous default judgment and granted the respondent an extension of time to file their response, meaning the case will now proceed to a full hearing on the merits.
Reference: 3300944/2021 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: Secretary of State for Justice
The claimant won because the Tribunal upheld her complaints of direct sex discrimination, harassment related to sex, direct discrimination related to vegan beliefs, and harassment related to vegan beliefs, and awarded her compensation for the resulting losses.
Reference: 3303470/2022 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Employer: H&H Industries Ltd and Secretary of State
The claim was dismissed because the claimant failed to attend the hearing without providing an acceptable reason.
Reference: 3302888/2025 (View detailed case summary — Pro Research)
Search the full case database by keywords, case details, similar facts and compensation awarded.
Case details come from published tribunal decisions. Always check the official decision before relying on a result.