Case 1801299/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Dr O Taiwo, lay representative For the v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 1801299/2023
- Decision date
- 8 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge James Representation
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Dr O Taiwo, lay representative For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 29 August 2023 before Employment Judge James, the respondent's name was amended by consent to Routeware Limited. The claimant's application to amend his claim dated 1 June 2023 was refused, except that the particulars could provide further information about the harassment related to race claim set out in Box 15 of the claim form.
The tribunal held that it was reasonably practicable to submit the unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal claims in time, but that they were not submitted within a reasonable period thereafter. On that basis, the tribunal held that it had no jurisdiction to deal with those claims and dismissed them.
The tribunal also held that the disability discrimination claim and the harassment related to race claim were submitted out of time. Those claims were likewise outside the tribunal's jurisdiction and were dismissed. No monetary award was recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held it was reasonably practicable to present the claim in time, but it was not presented within a reasonable period thereafter, so the tribunal had no jurisdiction. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment describes this as wrongful dismissal (i.e. breach of contract). It was found to be out of time on the same jurisdictional basis as the unfair dismissal claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal found the disability discrimination claim was submitted out of time and therefore outside its jurisdiction. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The harassment related to race claim, as referred to in Box 15, was found to have been submitted out of time and was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. | Dismissed | Race | — |
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.