Case 2300522/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Sembuga v Royal Mencap Society — 2021
- Case reference
- 2300522/2020
- Decision date
- 25 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sage Representation
- Venue
- London South Croydon
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Sembuga
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr D Sembuga brought a claim for unfair dismissal against Royal Mencap Society. The hearing took place at London South Croydon by CVP on 25 January 2021 before Employment Judge Sage; the claimant did not attend and the respondent was represented by Mr Perry of Counsel.
The tribunal found that the claimant was not engaged under a contract of employment pursuant to section 230 Employment Rights Act 1996. It also found that the claimant was not continuously employed for a period of two years. On those findings, the claim for unfair dismissal was dismissed.
No monetary remedy was awarded or recorded. The judgment states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within the stated time limit.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim after finding that the claimant was not engaged under a contract of employment pursuant to section 230 Employment Rights Act 1996 and was not continuously employed for two years. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 230 Employment Rights Act 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.