Case 1303074/2024 · Employment Tribunal
G Ogunbayo v Commissioners for HM Revenue & Customs — 2025
- Case reference
- 1303074/2024
- Decision date
- 8 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Connolly’s
Parties
2 namedClaimant
G Ogunbayo
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal considered the respondent's application to strike out the claim on the papers. The claimant had been given until 5 July 2025 to object to the proposed strike out or request a hearing; he emailed the tribunal on 4 July 2025 without an attachment, and the attachment submitted on 8 July 2025 was considered before judgment. He did not request a hearing.
The tribunal found from papers relating to a 2016 claim that the claimant was seeking to raise the same matters as in that earlier claim, except that the earlier claim had initially included unfair dismissal, race discrimination and sex discrimination, while the present claim alleged race discrimination only. The earlier sex discrimination complaint had been dismissed following withdrawal, the earlier claim had been struck out in its entirety, reconsideration had been refused, and the Employment Appeal Tribunal had dismissed the appeal as having no reasonable prospect of success.
Applying the principle that the same matter cannot be litigated twice, described as cause of action estoppel, the tribunal concluded that the present claim was very obviously vexatious and plainly had no reasonable prospect of success. It found that strike out was appropriate having regard to the overriding objective, and granted the respondent's application.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The race discrimination claim was struck out on the papers as vexatious and having no reasonable prospect of success because it duplicated matters previously litigated. | Struck out | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- cause of action estoppel
- overriding objective
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.