Case 2600449/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Ayo Ogunade v Shoots Training — 2026
- Case reference
- 2600449/2025
- Decision date
- 17 July 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Welch
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ayo Ogunade
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out Ayo Ogunade's claim against Shoots Training. On 29 May 2026, it wrote to the claimant warning that it was considering striking out the claim because it appeared that the claimant had not complied with its order dated 12 December 2025 and that the claim had not been actively pursued. The letter offered the claimant an opportunity to explain why the claim should continue or to request a hearing. The claimant did not reply.
Employment Judge Welch was satisfied that the grounds for striking out under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 applied and that striking out accorded with the overriding objective in Rule 3. The judgment, approved on 17 July 2026, stated that the hearing scheduled for 22–24 September 2027 would not take place. It did not identify the underlying claim type or record any monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the underlying claim type. The claim was struck out under Rule 38. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- Rule 3 overriding objective
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.