Case 2303812/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Oyebambo Sobowale v Compass Group UK & Ireland Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2303812/2022
- Decision date
- 28 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dyal Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Oyebambo Sobowale
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment recorded preliminary outcomes following a hearing at London South Employment Tribunal on 28 October 2024 before Employment Judge Dyal. The tribunal found it was just and equitable to extend time for the reasonable adjustments complaint, so it had jurisdiction to hear that complaint.
The tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the unfair dismissal complaint. It found the complaint had been presented outside the primary time limit in circumstances where presenting it within that time limit was reasonably practicable.
The claim for ill-health disability allowance was struck out because it had no reasonable prospect of success and/or because the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear it. The redundancy payment claim was dismissed following withdrawal. No monetary remedy was awarded in the written judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment extended time for the reasonable adjustments complaint on just and equitable grounds and held that the tribunal had jurisdiction to hear it; it did not determine the merits of that complaint. | Other | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to hear the unfair dismissal complaint because it was presented outside the primary time limit when presentation in time was reasonably practicable. | Other | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment describes this as a claim for ill-health disability allowance and struck it out as having no reasonable prospect of success and/or because the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Struck out | — | — |
| Redundancy | The claim for a redundancy payment was dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- just and equitable
- reasonably practicable
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.