Case 2202383/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Antwi-Bousiako (legal rep) For v Respondent — 2019
- Case reference
- 2202383/2019
- Decision date
- 6 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mr
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr K Antwi-Bousiako (legal rep) For
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a short case-management judgment at London Central on 5 December 2019 before Employment Judge J S Burns sitting alone. The judgment does not determine the substantive employment claims; it deals only with the status of Jaswant Jessica Walia as a respondent.
The tribunal removed Jaswant Jessica Walia from the proceedings under Rule 34. The judge recorded that, taking the claims at their highest, she was not the claimant's employer. The judgment also records that she would be undergoing a significant medical procedure during or shortly before the listed trial.
The judge said that, without a significant adjournment which neither side wanted, it would not be possible to have a fair trial against her as a party. No substantive remedies were awarded and no claim was finally determined in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment is a short case-management decision, not a merits determination. Employment Judge Burns ordered that Jaswant Jessica Walia be removed from the case as a respondent under Rule 34 because, taking the claims at their highest, she was not the claimant's employer and because her impending significant medical procedure meant a fair trial against her as a party would not be possible without a significant adjournment, which neither side wanted. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 34 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.