Case 2203021/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Akindutire, Lay Representative For the v Respondent — 2020
- Case reference
- 2203021/2019
- Decision date
- 20 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Norris
- Venue
- Central London
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr M Akindutire, Lay Representative For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a judge-alone hearing before Employment Judge Norris at Central London on 19-20 February 2020. The claimant was represented by Mr M Akindutire and the respondent by Miss B Venkata.
The tribunal recorded a single claim for unfair dismissal. It found that the claim was not well-founded and dismissed it. No further reasoning is set out in the written record because the reasons for the decision were given orally at the hearing.
The decision notice does not record any monetary award or remedy, and it states that written reasons would not be provided unless a written request was made within 14 days of the decision being sent to the parties.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal stated that the claimant's claim for unfair dismissal was not well-founded and was dismissed. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, and no written reasons were provided in the record of the decision. | 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.