Case 3200058/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Olugbeminiyi Ijaola v Shield Contract Services (UK) Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 3200058/2019
- Decision date
- 1 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Burgher Appearances
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Olugbeminiyi Ijaola
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 1 August 2019 at the East London Hearing Centre, Employment Judge Burgher recorded a consent judgment under Rule 64. The parties agreed that the default judgment dated 20 May 2019 would be set aside. The claimant withdrew his claim against Shield Contract Services (UK) Ltd and agreed to withdraw his connected claim in the London South Employment Tribunal against TOK Construction Limited, case number 2300081/2019, by 8 August 2019.
The respondent agreed to pay £500 in full and final settlement of this claim and the connected claim by 15 August 2019. The judgment stated that claim 3200058/2019 would be dismissed by the tribunal on 19 August 2019 unless there was prior objection. The extracted text contains no findings on the underlying merits and does not split the £500 between the two cases.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Consent judgment under Rule 64. The claimant withdrew this claim; the respondent agreed to pay £500 in full and final settlement of this claim and connected case 2300081/2019. The text does not identify the substantive cause of action or make any merits findings. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £500
- across all upheld claims
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.