Case 3301920/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Iphilia Registe v Kingsborough Centre — 2025
- Case reference
- 3301920/2024
- Decision date
- 8 April 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Magee Representation
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Iphilia Registe
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs Iphilia Registe brought a claim against Kingsborough Centre at Watford Employment Tribunal. The hearing took place on 4 and 5 February 2025 before Employment Judge M Magee, with the claimant represented by her sister and the respondent represented by a litigation consultant.
The written judgment records a single substantive outcome: the claimant's unfair dismissal claim was well founded and succeeded. No further factual findings, legal reasoning, or separate liability conclusions are included in the extracted text.
The record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested. The extracted text does not set out any remedy award, so no monetary outcome can be extracted from the judgment text provided.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The written judgment records only that the claimant's unfair dismissal claim was well founded and succeeded. No separate remedy figure is stated in the extracted text. | Upheld | — | — |
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
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.