Case 3200788/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Okhodi v Ward Security Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 3200788/2023
- Decision date
- 13 November 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge B Elgot Appearances
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Okhodi
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing at East London Hearing Centre on 9 November 2023, Employment Judge B Elgot struck out and dismissed Mr A Okhodi's unfair dismissal claim against Ward Security Limited. The judgment states that the Employment Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear that claim because the Claimant had not been employed for the two year qualifying period.
The disability discrimination claim was lodged out of time, but the Employment Judge was satisfied that it was just and equitable to extend the time limit until 28 April 2023, the date on which the claim was lodged. That claim was therefore allowed to proceed to determination by a full Tribunal at a final hearing.
The Employment Judge also directed that the remaining disability discrimination claim be listed for a further three-hour preliminary hearing by CVP on 5 February 2024. The purpose of that hearing was for an Employment Judge to consider whether a deposit order should be made under Rule 39 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 in relation to any allegation or argument said to have little prospect of success. No remedy or monetary award was recorded in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the unfair dismissal claim was struck out and dismissed because the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear it, as the Claimant had not been employed for the two year qualifying period. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The disability discrimination claim was not finally determined. The judgment extended time on a just and equitable basis and directed that the claim proceed, with a further preliminary hearing listed to consider whether a deposit order should be made. | Other | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- just and equitable
- Rule 39 Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
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.