Case 2201562/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms A Adjei-Agyekum v Benugo Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2201562/2024
- Decision date
- 31 May 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ms
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms A Adjei-Agyekum
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant brought this case after two earlier Tribunal claims, case numbers 2200821/2023 and 2209558/2023, had been struck out on 23 January 2024. The present claim was lodged with ACAS on 24 January 2024. It sought 4 weeks' notice pay, which the Claimant said she had not included in the earlier claims because she was a litigant in person and was learning as she went along.
The Tribunal recorded that the Claimant resigned from her employment by email on 13 June 2023 because she was sick of the Respondent's behaviour towards her, and that she gave no notice of termination. The Respondent accepted that email as an unequivocal termination with immediate effect. The Judge held that, on the facts pleaded by the Claimant, the Respondent had not dismissed her and therefore was not under a contractual duty to pay notice pay.
The Tribunal therefore struck out the claim under Rule 37(1)(a) on the basis that it had no reasonable prospect of success. It also held that the claim was an abuse of process, applying the rule in Henderson v Henderson, because the Claimant had had from June 2023 until the strike-out of her earlier claims on 23 January 2024 to raise the notice-pay issue in those proceedings, but instead started a new claim immediately afterwards. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The Claimant sought 4 weeks' notice pay, described in the judgment as a wrongful dismissal claim and framed as a contractual notice-pay claim. The Tribunal struck it out under Rule 37(1)(a) because the Respondent did not dismiss her; she resigned on 13 June 2023 with immediate effect. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 37(1)(a)
- Henderson v Henderson
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.