Case 1803458/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Ibekwe (Brighton and Hove Race project) For the v Respondent — 2022
- Case reference
- 1803458/2021
- Decision date
- 27 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Davies Appearances
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr D Ibekwe (Brighton and Hove Race project) For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Leeds on 27 May 2022, Employment Judge Davies dealt with claim 1806684/2021, brought by Mr M Kamuche against Kirklees College. The judgment records a complaint of automatically unfair dismissal under s.104 Employment Rights Act 1996.
The tribunal held that the complaint had no reasonable prospect of success and struck it out. No written reasons were provided beyond the oral reasons given at the hearing, and the written record does not set out further factual findings or any monetary remedy.
The record is limited to the strike-out decision itself and does not identify any award or liability findings beyond the dismissal of the claim on that procedural basis.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the complaint of automatically unfair dismissal under s.104 Employment Rights Act 1996 in claim 1806684/2021 had no reasonable prospect of success and was struck out. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.104 Employment Rights Act 1996
- no reasonable prospect of success
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.