Case 1811325/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr JB Ilangaratne v Humber Teaching NHS Foundation Trust AT A PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2019
- Case reference
- 1811325/2018
- Decision date
- 22 January 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lancaster Representation
- Venue
- Hull
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr JB Ilangaratne
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing in Hull on 22 January 2019 before Employment Judge Lancaster, the Tribunal recorded a judgment by consent. The Claimant’s complaints of breach of contract and/or breach of the implied term as to trust and confidence were dismissed upon withdrawal, and the Tribunal also said it had no jurisdiction to hear them while the Claimant remained in employment.
The judgment also disposed of the complaint concerning Dr Wood’s actions on 26 April 2017, which was described as either racial harassment or direct discrimination because of race. That complaint was dismissed upon withdrawal. The short judgment did not set out any disputed factual findings, legal tests, or remedy assessment, and no monetary award was recorded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The complaint of breach of contract and/or breach of the implied term as to trust and confidence was dismissed upon withdrawal, and the Tribunal said it had no jurisdiction to hear it while the Claimant remained in employment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The complaint about Dr Wood's actions on 26 April 2017, framed as either racial harassment or direct discrimination because of race, was dismissed upon withdrawal. | 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 4 PDF on gov.uk
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.