Case 2500019/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Echendu (Administrator of the estate of Obiukwu Chigozie Iwuchukwu) First v South Tyneside and Sunderland NHS Foundation Trust Second Respondent: Dr I Martin Heard in person at Newcastle — 2023
- Case reference
- 2500019/2023
- Decision date
- 24 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Aspden Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Echendu (Administrator of the estate of Obiukwu Chigozie Iwuchukwu) First
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 23 May 2023 before Employment Judge Aspden, with no attendance for the claimant, the tribunal dealt with strike-out applications on the papers before it. Ms C Millns, counsel, appeared for the respondents and Dr I Martin appeared in person for the second respondent.
The tribunal struck out the claimant's Equality Act 2010 complaints of race discrimination, disability discrimination and victimisation as an abuse of process. It also struck out the breach of contract claim insofar as it was brought under the Employment Tribunals (Extension of Jurisdiction) Order 1994 as an abuse of process.
The tribunal further held that it had no jurisdiction to consider the common-law negligence and/or breach of duty of care claim, the part of the breach of contract claim brought otherwise than under the Extension of Jurisdiction Order, and the victimisation complaint insofar as it was advanced outside the Equality Act 2010. The judgment ordered the claimant to pay the first respondent £8,946 in costs.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Struck out as an abuse of process under the Equality Act 2010. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Disability discrimination | Struck out as an abuse of process under the Equality Act 2010. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | The Equality Act 2010 victimisation complaint was struck out as an abuse of process; the victimisation complaint insofar as advanced other than under the Equality Act 2010 was struck out for lack of jurisdiction. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract claim was struck out as an abuse of process insofar as it was brought under the Employment Tribunals (Extension of Jurisdiction) Order 1994, and struck out for lack of jurisdiction insofar as it was brought otherwise. | Struck out | — | — |
| Other | The claim alleging negligence at common law and/or breach of a duty of care was struck out because the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to consider it. | Struck out | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,946
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- abuse of process
- Employment Tribunals (Extension of Jurisdiction) Order 1994
- no jurisdiction
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.