Case 3205235/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Mpiani v Ian Mikardo High School — 2023
- Case reference
- 3205235/2022
- Decision date
- 4 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge P Klimov
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K Mpiani
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr K Mpiani brought proceedings against Ian Mikardo High School including a race discrimination complaint and other employment claims. The hearing took place by video on 4 May 2023 before Employment Judge P Klimov sitting alone.
The tribunal recorded that the claimant's race discrimination complaint was dismissed upon withdrawal. It also recorded that all other complaints in the proceedings were struck out because they had been presented outside the three months' time limit, and the tribunal found that it had been reasonably practicable for those complaints to have been presented before the end of that limitation period.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The race discrimination complaint was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out because it was presented outside the three months' time limit, when it was reasonably practicable for the complaint to have been presented before the end of that limitation period. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Struck out because it was presented outside the three months' time limit, when it was reasonably practicable for the complaint to have been presented before the end of that limitation period. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Struck out because it was presented outside the three months' time limit, when it was reasonably practicable for the complaint to have been presented before the end of that limitation period. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | Struck out because it was presented outside the three months' time limit, when it was reasonably practicable for the complaint to have been presented before the end of that limitation period. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- reasonably practicable
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 4 PDF on gov.uk
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.