Case 1301481/2023 · Employment Tribunal
In Person v Mr. K. Zaman — 2024
- Case reference
- 1301481/2023
- Decision date
- 8 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wedderspoon Representation
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In Person
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Miss A. Ndow, brought claims including unfair dismissal, automatically unfair dismissal, and disability discrimination against University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust. The hearing took place at Birmingham on 8 January 2024 before Employment Judge Wedderspoon. The respondent was represented by Mr. K. Zaman and the claimant appeared in person.
The tribunal held that the unfair dismissal and automatically unfair dismissal claims were brought out of time. It found that it was reasonably practicable to have brought those claims in time, and both were dismissed on that basis. The judgment does not record any substantive findings on the merits of those dismissal claims.
The tribunal also held that the disability discrimination complaints were brought out of time. It decided that it was not just and equitable to extend time for those complaints. All claims were therefore dismissed. No remedy award was made.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the unfair dismissal complaint was brought out of time and that it was reasonably practicable to have brought it in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The judgment refers to an automatically unfair dismissal claim. It was found to be out of time and it was reasonably practicable to have brought it in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The disability discrimination complaints were brought out of time and the tribunal did not consider it just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- reasonably practicable
- just and equitable
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.