Case 2203785/2021 · Employment Tribunal

Mr Chibueze Ekeanyanwu v Cordant Security Ltd — 2022

Case reference: 2203785/2021
Decision date: 26 January 2022
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Baty JUDGMENT

Indexed: 20 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr Chibueze Ekeanyanwu

Respondent

Cordant Security Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The Tribunal struck out the complaint of unfair dismissal. It had written to the claimant on 29 June 2021 giving him an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing about why that claim should not be struck out, because it appeared he had been employed for less than two years and the Tribunal could not consider the unfair dismissal complaint if that was so.

The claimant failed to make representations in writing, failed to make sufficient representations, or failed to request a hearing. The Tribunal therefore struck out the unfair dismissal complaint. The separate complaint of unlawful deduction from wages was not determined in this judgment and remained listed for hearing on 1 February 2022.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The unfair dismissal complaint was struck out after the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on the apparent issue that he had been employed for less than two years, and he failed to make sufficient representations or request a hearing.	Struck out	—	—

Legal tests applied

1 reference

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.