Case 2202182/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss P Nwoko v Inmarsat Global Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2202182/2019
- Decision date
- 10 July 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Glennie JUDGMENT
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss P Nwoko
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out Miss P Nwoko's unfair dismissal complaint under rule 37(1)(a) because it had no reasonable prospect of success. Assuming she was an employee, the tribunal found that her employment with Inmarsat Global Limited lasted about two weeks, so she could not satisfy the two-year qualifying period in section 108(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The tribunal also held that the points relied on by the claimant, namely that the dismissal was an act of discrimination or victimisation, did not bring the case within any exception to that qualifying period.
The race discrimination complaint was not struck out. Employment Judge Glennie held that the claimant's submission that there had been a significant and unjustified difference in treatment between her and a colleague of a different ethnicity could, if proved, amount to the 'something more' needed to support an inference of discrimination. The tribunal noted that the claim appeared to have been brought out of time, but said it was open to the tribunal to extend time if just and equitable to do so. The judgment made no merits finding on the race claim and expressly said it was not deciding whether the claim had little reasonable prospect of success for deposit-order purposes.
The respondent's request to postpone the listed preliminary hearing for case management on 16 July 2020 was refused. The tribunal said that, because the strike-out application had been determined, the preliminary hearing should proceed so that the full hearing could be re-listed and case management orders made to take the case forward.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out under rule 37(1)(a) on the ground that it had no reasonable prospect of success. The tribunal held that, assuming the claimant was an employee, her employment lasted about two weeks so she could not meet the two-year qualifying period in section 108(1) ERA 1996; the discrimination/victimisation points relied on were not exceptions to that rule. | Struck out | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The respondent's strike-out application was refused. The tribunal said the claimant's case on a significant, unjustified difference in treatment between her and a colleague of a different ethnicity could, if proved, provide the 'something more' needed to shift the burden of proof. The tribunal noted a possible time-bar issue but made no merits finding and expressly said it was not deciding whether a deposit order test was met. | Other | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- rule 37(1)(a) no reasonable prospect of success
- s.108(1) ERA 1996
- just and equitable time extension
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.