Miss M Y Kay

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.

The tribunal found by majority that the claimant was automatically unfairly dismissed for making protected disclosures under the Public Interest Disclosure Act, having rejected the respondent's account of the facts and accepted the claimant's evidence on the disputed conversations and the true reason for dismissal.

• •protected disclosures
• •reason for dismissal

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).…