Case 3305806/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms N Adisenu v Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust — 2022
- Case reference
- 3305806/2021
- Decision date
- 5 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge QUILL Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms N Adisenu
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment concerned two specified complaints of race discrimination brought by Ms N Adisenu against Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust. The tribunal struck out the complaints as they related to alleged conduct of Ms Giannoupoulou in July 2019, identified as paragraph 7.72 of the list of issues, and non-appointment to any of the posts, identified as paragraph 7.7.1 of the list of issues.
The reason given was that the claimant had been ordered, following a preliminary hearing on 22 February 2022, to pay two deposits of £250 each. The order was sent to the claimant on 22 April 2022 and required payment within 21 days. The claimant failed to pay either deposit, so the specified complaints were struck out under rule 39(4) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The judgment records no remedy award. It states that the strike-out did not affect the other complaints and that the parties were required to continue complying with case management orders for the final hearing, which remained scheduled as previously notified.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The struck-out complaints were the race discrimination complaints concerning alleged conduct of Ms Giannoupoulou in July 2019 and non-appointment to any of the posts. The judgment states that other complaints were not affected. | Struck out | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 39(4) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 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.