Case 2304541/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Aishat Azeez v Kent Community Health NHS Foundation Trust — 2024
- Case reference
- 2304541/2023
- Decision date
- 18 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Krepski Tribunal
- Venue
- London South
- Panel members
- Tribunal Member Leverton, Tribunal Member Edwards
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Aishat Azeez
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAishat Azeez's complaint of direct race/nationality discrimination against Kent Community Health NHS Foundation Trust was found not well-founded and dismissed. The tribunal also dismissed her breach of contract complaint concerning notice pay, her breach of contract complaint concerning car hire/car leasing, and her complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages, each as not well-founded.
The employer's contract claim succeeded. The written record states that remedy would be determined at a separate hearing if required, so no monetary award is recorded in this judgment.
The judgment was heard at London South on 1-3 October 2024 before Employment Judge Krepski with Tribunal Members Leverton and Edwards. The written record notes that reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The judgment describes this as a complaint of direct race/nationality discrimination and dismisses it as not well-founded. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Breach of contract | Complaint in relation to notice pay; dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Complaint in relation to car hire/car leasing; dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages; dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Employer's contract claim succeeded; remedy was left to be determined at a separate hearing if required. | Upheld | — | — |
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.