Back to search
[2026] EAT 39Claimant Successful

Miss M Y Kay

10 March 2026England & WalesEmployment Judge Auerbach
GOV.UK

Case Summary

The employment tribunal decided, by a majority, that the claimant was automatically unfairly dismissed for making protected disclosures. There were factual issues before the tribunal as to whether the claimed conversations had taken place, what was said, and the reason for dismissal. The majority's conclusions on these issues were not perverse.

Key Issues

  • protected disclosures
  • reason for dismissal

Claim Types

Cited Laws and Legal Issues

Employment Rights Act 1996 unfair dismissalEmployment Rights Act 1996

Terminating my employment for whistleblowing is automatically unfair dismissal, and this claim is open to me even though I have not be

Protected disclosures / whistleblowingEmployment Rights Act 1996

laimant was automatically unfairly dismissed for making protected disclosures. There were factual issues before the tribunal as to wh

Decision Text

Judgment approved by the court for handing down The Laurels Family Assessment Ltd v Miss M Kay © EAT 2026 Page 1 [2026] EAT 39 Neutral Citation Number: [2026] EAT 39 Case No: EA-2023-001455-AT EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL Rolls Building Fetter Lane, London, EC4A 1NL Date: 10 March 2026 Before : HIS HONOUR JUDGE AUERBACH - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Between : THE LAURELS FAMILY ASSESSMENT LIMITED Appellant - and – MISS M Y KAY Respondent - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Lorraine Mensah (instructed by Forbes Solicitors LLP) for the Appellant The Respondent in person Hearing date: 22 January 2026 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT Judgment approved by the court for handing down The Laurels Family Assessment Ltd v Miss M Kay © EAT 2026 Page 2 [2026] EAT 39 SUMMARY PROTECTED DISCLOSURES The employment tribunal decided, by a majority, that the claimant was automatically unfairly dismissed for making protected disclosures. She claimed to have made such disclosures on two occasions. There were factual issues before the tribunal as to whether the first claimed conversation had taken place at all, as to what had been said on the second occasion, and as to the reason or principal reason for the dismissal, which took place on the same day as the second conversation. The majority’s conclusions on all of these issues, and overall, were not perverse, nor was their reasoning flawed or insufficiently explained. The employer’s appeal was accordingly dismissed. Judgment approved by the court for handing down The Laurels Family Assessment Ltd v Miss M Kay © EAT 2026 Page 3 [2026] EAT 39 HIS HONOUR JUDGE AUERBACH: Introduction 1. The respondent in the employment tribunal appeals from the reserved decision of the tribunal arising from a hearing at Manchester (held by CVP)....

Download full PDF

Employer

Case Details

Case Number
[2026] EAT 39
Tribunal
Employment Appeal Tribunal
Level
Appeal
Decision Date
10/03/2026
Published
10/03/2026
Jurisdiction
England & Wales
Judge
Employment Judge Auerbach