Case 3202445/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Ohene-Adjei v Ormiston Park Academy and 2 others — 2021
- Case reference
- 3202445/2020
- Decision date
- 5 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Russell Representation
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
4 namedClaimant
Mr R Ohene-Adjei
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 10 May 2021, Employment Judge Russell considered whether Ms S Owen, the Local Authority Designated Officer employed by Thurrock Council, could be pursued as a third respondent in the claimant's race and sex discrimination claims. The tribunal set out the Equality Act 2010 agency provisions and the time limit issue under s.123 EqA 2010.
The tribunal accepted Ms Owen's evidence and contemporaneous records. It found that, on 17 December 2019, the Principal made the suspension decision after seeking her advice, and that Ms Owen had made clear on both 17 and 20 December 2019 that suspension was a matter for the employer. It also found that her involvement in the investigation, the 11 February 2020 outcome letter, and the direction that a copy be kept on the claimant's personnel file were all consistent with her role as LADO and with Department for Education safeguarding guidance.
The tribunal rejected the claimant's case that Ms Owen had overstepped her role or was acting as the academy's agent. It held that she was acting at all material times in her capacity as LADO for Thurrock Borough Council, not on behalf of Ormiston Park Academy, and that there was no cogent evidence to support an agency relationship under s.109 EqA 2010. The tribunal also rejected the suggested inference of a cover-up.
In the alternative, the tribunal held that the claims against Ms Owen were out of time. It found that the last relevant conduct was 25 February 2020, that the claim form was presented on 18 September 2020, and that it would not be just and equitable to extend time. The tribunal therefore struck out all claims against the third respondent.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Preliminary hearing only. The tribunal held that the third respondent was not acting as an agent of the first respondent and, alternatively, that the claim was out of time and it was not just and equitable to extend time. No merits finding was made. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Sex discrimination | Preliminary hearing only. The tribunal held that the third respondent was not acting as an agent of the first respondent and, alternatively, that the claim was out of time and it was not just and equitable to extend time. No merits finding was made. | Struck out | Sex | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- s.109 Equality Act 2010
- s.110 Equality Act 2010
- s.123 Equality Act 2010
- Yearwood v The Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis
- Kemeh v Ministry of Defence
- Unite the Union v Nailard
- British Coal Corporation v Keeble
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.