Case 3307040/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Z Yorgova v Ferida Akhtar and 1 other — 2023
- Case reference
- 3307040/2022
- Decision date
- 12 February 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Maxwell Date
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Z Yorgova
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal stated that the claimant’s claim against the second respondent, Centurion Healthcare Ltd, was struck out because it had been presented before she had obtained an ACAS certificate. On that basis, the tribunal said it had no jurisdiction over the claim against the second respondent.
The reasons add that they are set out in an order of the same date, which also immediately adds the second respondent back as a party pursuant to rule 34. On the face of the extracted text, the express determination is the strike-out for lack of an ACAS certificate, but the rule 34 reference makes the procedural position less clear from this extract alone.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The extracted text does not identify the underlying substantive cause of action. It states that the claim against the second respondent was struck out because it was presented before the claimant had obtained an ACAS certificate, so the tribunal said it had no jurisdiction. The reasons also refer to an order of the same date that immediately adds the second respondent back as a party pursuant to rule 34, so the procedural effect is not fully clear from this extract. | Struck out | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.