Case 2301582/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Abidogun v ISS Mediclean Ltd T/A ISS Facility Services Healthcare — 2024
- Case reference
- 2301582/2022
- Decision date
- 6 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Leith
- Venue
- Croydon
- Panel members
- Mrs J Jerram, Mr D Rogers
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Abidogun
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at Croydon before Employment Judge Leith with Mrs J Jerram and Mr D Rogers, heard Mr J Abidogun's claims against ISS Mediclean Limited t/a ISS Facility Services Healthcare on 30 and 31 July and 1 and 2 August 2024. In the written record of the decision, the tribunal recorded that the complaint of direct race discrimination failed and was dismissed.
The tribunal also recorded that the complaint of harassment related to religion or belief failed and was dismissed. The complaint of unfair dismissal likewise failed and was dismissed.
The written record states that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in accordance with the note on the decision form. No remedy was awarded in the written record.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | 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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.