Employment Tribunal Rejects Health and Safety Claim for Lack of Jurisdiction
📌 In brief
In this employment tribunal case, the judge ruled that the health and safety complaint made by an employee was outside the court's authority to decide. This means the employee cannot pursue this type of issue through the Employment Tribunal.
⚖️ Legal holding
An employment tribunal does not have jurisdiction over certain types of health and safety complaints.
📖 Technical summary
The Employment Tribunal dismissed a health and safety complaint due to lack of jurisdiction.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Employment Tribunal dismissed the health and safety complaint brought by the claimant against their employer, finding that it lacked jurisdiction to hear such a case.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Dismissed
Case Number: 6023347/2025 & 6007406/2026
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
Claimant: [redacted]
Respondent: [redacted]
Heard at: Cambridge Employment Tribunal (in private; by CVP) On: 20 May 2026
Before: Employment Judge Hutchings (sitting alone)
Appearances For the claimant: [redacted] For the respondent: [redacted]
JUDGMENT
The health and safety complaint is dismissed as the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction.
Approved by:
Employment Judge Hutchings
20 May 2026
JUDGMENT SENT TO THE PARTIES ON
21 May 2026
FOR THE TRIBUNAL OFFICE
Notes Reasons for the judgment having been given orally at the hearing, written reasons will not be provided unless a request was made by either party at the hearing or a written request is
presented by either party within 14 days of the sending of this written record of the decision. If written reasons are provided they will be placed online. All judgments (apart from judgments under Rule 51) and any written reasons for the judgments are published, in full, online at https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions shortly after a copy has been sent to the [NAME]. If a Tribunal hearing has been recorded, you may request a transcript of the recording. Unless there are exceptional circumstances, you will have to pay for it. If a transcript is produced it will not include any oral judgment or reasons given at the hearing. The transcript will not be checked, approved or verified by a judge. There is more information in the joint Presidential Practice Direction on the Recording and Transcription of Hearings and accompanying Guidance, which can be found here:
www.judiciary.uk/guidance-and-resources/employment-rules-and-legislation-practice-directions/
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- Employment Tribunal Late Filing Costs Claimant: Unfair & Wrongful Dismissal Claims Rejected
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rejects Unfair Dismissal Claim
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rejects Unfair Dismissal and Breach of Contract Claims
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Dismisses Case for Non-Compliance
- Employment Tribunal Claim Dismissed: Tribunal Awards Costs for Vexatious Conduct
- Employment Tribunal Late Claims Dismissed by Employment Tribunal
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rejects Disability and Age Discrimination Claims
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rejects Disability Discrimination Complaint
A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The case was dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction over certain health and safety complaints.
- Claims were struck out for not having a reasonable prospect of success.
- Cases were dismissed when the claimant did not have the required permission from the Employment Appeal Tribunal.
- Dismissals occurred when claims were pursued outside of applicable time limits set by law.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The employment tribunal dismissed a health and safety complaint for lack of jurisdiction.
Who was involved?
An employee (the claimant) brought a case against their employer (the respondent).
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that it lacked the authority to hear health and safety complaints, which is outside its jurisdiction.
Which laws or rules were applied?
No specific laws or regulations were cited in this decision.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The lack of jurisdiction over health and safety issues was the central reason for dismissal.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the claimant, dismissing their complaint.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone with a health and safety issue should seek advice on alternative routes to address such concerns.
What evidence or documents mattered?
No specific evidence or documents were mentioned as crucial in the decision.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Decisions can often be appealed, but it's important to check if there are grounds for appeal based on the specifics of the case.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is advisable to seek legal advice from a qualified solicitor for guidance on your specific situation.