Case 2301243/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Boniface Chijioke Igwe v Tribal EMEA Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 2301243/2025
- Decision date
- 2 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lumby REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Boniface Chijioke Igwe
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis is a costs judgment following a strike-out hearing on 12 September 2025. The claimant had originally brought claims including unfair dismissal (later withdrawn for lack of qualifying service), a breach of Regulation 7(1) of the TUPE Regulations, a claim recast as breach of the implied term of trust and confidence, and a holiday pay claim. The Employment Judge dismissed the TUPE claim for want of jurisdiction (and would have struck it out in the alternative), struck out the trust and confidence claim as having no reasonable prospect of success, and made an agreed unless order in respect of the holiday pay claim requiring the claimant to clarify it within two weeks.
On the respondent's costs application under the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure 2024, the judge applied the two-stage test under Rule 74(2): first finding that the claimant had acted unreasonably in bringing and continuing the TUPE and trust and confidence complaints despite repeated cost warning letters and legal representation, and that the conduct of the holiday pay claim was also unreasonable; and second, exercising discretion in favour of making a costs order.
The respondent claimed £6,735.73 (counsel's brief fee of £3,000 and solicitors' costs of £3,735.73). The judge found counsel's fee reasonable, reduced the solicitors' costs to 50% (£1,867.87) given the absence of a detailed schedule and unreasonable hourly rates and totals, and applied a further 10% discount to reflect that the holiday pay claim survived. The judge declined to take the claimant's financial circumstances into account under Rule 82. The claimant was ordered to pay a contribution to the respondent's costs of £4,381.08.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Withdrawn by the claimant due to lack of two years' qualifying service. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | Claim under Regulation 7(1) TUPE Regulations dismissed for want of jurisdiction (less than two years' service); alternatively found to have no reasonable prospect of success and would have been struck out. The claimant's attempt to recast the claim under s.104 ERA 1996 in the skeleton argument was rejected as it was not the pleaded case and no amendment had been made. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Claim for breach of the implied term of trust and confidence (recast from an original breach of contract claim) struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success; found to be an attempt to circumvent the two-year unfair dismissal qualifying period. | Struck out | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Not struck out; an agreed unless order was made requiring the claimant to clarify the holiday pay claim within two weeks of the hearing. The judgment under review is a costs judgment and does not finally determine this claim. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
19 references- Rule 74(2) Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024
- Rule 75 Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024
- Rule 76(1) Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024
- Rule 82 Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024
- Gee v Shell Ltd [2003] IRLR 82 CA
- McPherson v BNP Paribas [2004] ICR 1398 CA
- Monaghan v Close Thornton [2002] EAT/0003/01
- Brooks v Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust [2019] WLUK 271, UKEAT/0246/18
- NPower Yorkshire Ltd v Daley EAT/0842/04
- Arrowsmith v Nottingham Trent University [2011] ICR 159 CA
- AQ Ltd v Holden [2012] IRLR 648 EAT
- Kapoor v Governing Body of Barnhill Community High School UKEAT/0352/13
- Barnsley BC v Yerrakalva [2012] IRLR 78 CA
- Shield Automotive Ltd v Greig UKEAT/0024/10
- Jilley v Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Trust [2008] UKEAT/0584/06
- Single Homeless Project v Abu [2013] UKEAT/0519/12
- Vaughan v LB of Newham [2013] IRLR 713
- Raggett v John Lewis plc [2012] IRLR 906 EAT
- Ladak v DRC Locums Ltd [2014] IRLR 851 EAT
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.