Case 2307953/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Z L Gilbert Kaluba v JD Wetherspoon — 2025
- Case reference
- 2307953/2023
- Decision date
- 6 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Heath Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Z L Gilbert Kaluba
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out the claim. It recorded that, by letter dated 17 June 2025, the claimant had been given an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out because the claimant had not complied with the Tribunal's order and the claim had not been actively pursued.
The Tribunal found that the claimant had failed to make written representations, had failed to make sufficient representations, and had not requested a hearing. The hearing listed for 02 February 2026 to 17 February 2026 was therefore vacated.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The judgment strikes out the claim as a whole. The judgment text does not set out the pleaded discrimination allegations separately; this classification follows the official listing category provided in the case context. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The judgment strikes out the claim as a whole. The judgment text does not set out the pleaded discrimination allegations separately; this classification follows the official listing category provided in the case context. | Struck out | Religion or belief | — |
| Sex discrimination | The judgment strikes out the claim as a whole. The judgment text does not set out the pleaded discrimination allegations separately; this classification follows the official listing category provided in the case context. | Struck out | Sex | — |
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.