Case 2303422/2021 · Employment Tribunal
K Adjei v FedEx Express UK Transportation Limited and 2 others — 2022
- Case reference
- 2303422/2021
- Decision date
- 9 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Burge Appearances
- Venue
- London South
Parties
4 namedClaimant
K Adjei
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing heard by video at London South Employment Tribunal on 9 May 2022, Employment Judge L Burge recorded that K Adjei withdrew specified claims against FedEX Express UK Transportation Limited and Ryan Bennett. The judgment dismissed those claims upon withdrawal by the Claimant.
The withdrawn claims were described as breach of the Fraud Act 2006, breach of the Data Protection Act 2018, failure to follow the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures 2015, breach of the Employment Rights Act 1996 Part 1 sections 1, 3 and 8, and discrimination on the grounds of religion and/or belief. No findings on liability or merits were recorded for those claims, and the judgment did not record any remedy or monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Claim described as breach of the Fraud Act 2006; dismissed upon withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | Claim described as breach of the Data Protection Act 2018; dismissed upon withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | Claim described as failure to follow the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures 2015; dismissed upon withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | Claim described as breach of the Employment Rights Act 1996, Part 1, sections 1, 3 and 8; dismissed upon withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | Discrimination on the grounds of religion and/or belief was dismissed upon withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | Religion or belief | — |
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.