Case 2200360/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Funmi Idowu v The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea — 2024
- Case reference
- 2200360/2023
- Decision date
- 30 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Singh
- Venue
- London Central
- Panel members
- Ms J Marshall, Ms S Pearlman
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Funmi Idowu
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at London Central Employment Tribunal on 13-17 March and 21-24 October 2024 before Employment Judge Singh sitting with Ms J Marshall and Ms S Pearlman. The judgment records Ms Funmi Idowu's claims against the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea.
The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim. It also dismissed each of the disability-related claims recorded in the judgment: direct disability discrimination, indirect disability discrimination, unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of a disability, failure to make reasonable adjustments, disability-related harassment, and victimisation. Each was stated to be not well-founded.
No monetary award is recorded in the extracted judgment text, and no remedy breakdown is set out. The extracted text provides the outcomes but does not include the tribunal's detailed factual reasons for those dismissals.
Claims and outcomes
7 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Claim for unfair dismissal; the tribunal found it was not well-founded and dismissed it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination claim; dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Indirect disability discrimination claim; dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Claim for unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of a disability; dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments; dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | Claim for disability-related harassment; dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | Victimisation claim; dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed |
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.