Case 1310590/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Modupe Raheem v The Secretary of State for Justice — 2021
- Case reference
- 1310590/2020
- Decision date
- 2 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dean Appearance
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Modupe Raheem
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the complaints that had been included in the claimant's first complaint in claim 1309278/2019, had been withdrawn, and were then included in additional documents dated 20 and 23 April 2020 seeking to amend the present claim.
Those amendment complaints sought to extend the ambit of the claim to bullying, victimisation and whistleblowing claims. The tribunal struck them out as an abuse of process. The claimant's remaining claims were not decided in this judgment and remained listed for a later hearing.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Complaints seeking to extend the claim to bullying were struck out as an abuse of process. | Struck out | — | — |
| Victimisation | Victimisation claims included in the claimant's additional documents of 20 and 23 April 2020 were struck out as an abuse of process. The judgment does not identify a protected characteristic for this claim. | Struck out | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Whistleblowing claims included in the claimant's additional documents of 20 and 23 April 2020 were struck out as an abuse of process. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37
- abuse of process
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.