Case 2403976/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J M Akpodiete v Continuum Support Care Services Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2403976/2023
- Decision date
- 15 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Cowen Non-Legal
- Panel members
- Ms L Heath, Mr R Cunningham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J M Akpodiete
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought a direct race discrimination claim concerning his suspension in August 2022, the investigation into alleged misconduct, the finding that he had committed gross misconduct, the rejection of his appeal, and references provided to prospective employers. The Tribunal also dismissed the respondent's preliminary application to strike out the claim and refused applications to adjourn the final hearing.
The Tribunal found that the claimant had not proved facts from which it could conclude that he was treated less favourably than someone in the same material circumstances of a different race was or would have been treated. It concluded that the burden of proof under section 136 of the Equality Act 2010 did not shift to the respondent, and dismissed the claim.
The Tribunal added that, even if the burden had shifted, it would have found that the respondent's decisions were due to the claimant's breach of company policy and failure to obey a direct management instruction, and that references were provided because of obligations relating to registered managers of care homes.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The judgment states that the claimant's claim for direct race discrimination fails and is dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- Rule 2 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- section 123 of the Equality Act 2010
- section 13 of the Equality Act 2010
- section 136 of the Equality Act 2010
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.