Case 1300970/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S. Abiola v Black Country Partnership Foundation Trust — 2019
- Case reference
- 1300970/2019
- Decision date
- 1 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Britton Representation
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S. Abiola
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr S. Abiola brought claims for unfair dismissal, unlawful deduction from wages, and race discrimination against Black Country Partnership Foundation Trust. At the hearing on 30 October 2019, the unfair dismissal and unlawful deduction from wages claims were dismissed on withdrawal by the Claimant.
The race discrimination claim was dismissed because it had been presented outside the time limit prescribed by s.123 Equality Act 2010. Employment Judge Britton held that it was not just and equitable to extend the time limit, so the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear that claim.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed on withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed on withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Dismissed because it was presented outside the time limit in s.123 Equality Act 2010. The tribunal held it was not just and equitable to extend the time limit and therefore did not have jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.123 Equality Act 2010
- just and equitable extension of time
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.