Edge Hill University

Case Summary

Mrs P Gumus claimed whistleblowing detriment, constructive dismissal, and automatically unfair dismissal against Edge Hill University. The tribunal found that whistleblowing detriment claims were out of time and lacked merit, and that both the constructive dismissal and automatically unfair dismissal complaints were not well founded.

The tribunal found that the claimant could reasonably have submitted her whistleblowing detriment claims within the primary time limit, and that on the merits they would not have succeeded. The complaints of constructive dismissal and automatically unfair dismissal were also not well founded.

Use these claim-type pages to compare this decision with other published tribunal cases, outcome patterns, and visible award data.

• •Whether claims of whistleblowing detriment were submitted within time limits
• •Whether whistleblowing detriment complaints would succeed on merit
• •Whether dismissal was constructive
• •Whether dismissal was automatically unfair under s.103A Employment Rights Act

Case No. 6004031/2024 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Mrs P Gumus Respondent: Edge Hill University HELD AT: Manchester ON: 23 rd , 24 th , 25 th , 26 th & 27 th March 2026 BEFORE: Employment Judge Anderson REPRESENTATION: Claimant: Respondent: In Person Mr Powell (Counsel) JUDGMENT 1. It was reasonably practicable for the Claimant to submit her claims of whistleblowing detriment within the primary time limit. Therefore, the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to consider these complaints. Had the complaints been submitted in time, they would not be upheld in any event. Therefore, the complaints of whistleblowing detriment are not well founded and are dismissed. 2. The complaint of constructive dismissal is not well founded and is dismissed. 3. The complaint of automatically unfair dismissal under s.103A Employment Rights Act is not well founded and is dismissed. Case No. 6004031/2024 _____________________________ Employment Judge Anderson 27 th March 2026 JUDGMENT SENT TO THE PARTIES ON 20 May 2026 FOR THE TRIBUNAL OFFICE Notes Reasons for the Judgment having been given…