Case 2205909/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Neither present nor represented v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 2205909/2022
- Decision date
- 11 April 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Glennie Representation
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Neither present nor represented
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr M Nwanze brought proceedings against Kocho Group Limited, Nicola Rees, Des Leckerman, Dawn Russell and Lynne Mallet. The case was heard at London Central on 11 April 2023 before Employment Judge Glennie. The claimant was neither present nor represented, and the respondent was represented by Mr A Rhodes, Counsel.
The tribunal recorded in its written judgment that both claims were dismissed pursuant to rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure. The decision states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons will not be provided unless a request was made at the hearing or in writing within 14 days of the written record being sent to the parties.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Claim type inferred from the gov.uk listing; the judgment itself only records that both claims were dismissed pursuant to rule 47 and does not separately identify the substantive heads. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Whistleblowing | Claim type inferred from the gov.uk listing; the judgment itself only records that both claims were dismissed pursuant to rule 47 and does not separately identify the substantive heads. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Claim type inferred from the gov.uk listing; the judgment itself only records that both claims were dismissed pursuant to rule 47 and does not separately identify the substantive heads. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim type inferred from the gov.uk listing; the judgment itself only records that both claims were dismissed pursuant to rule 47 and does not separately identify the substantive heads. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure
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.