Case 3307745/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Adeloye v Royal Mail Group Limited and 1 other — 2024
- Case reference
- 3307745/2023
- Decision date
- 4 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dick
- Venue
- Watford
- Panel members
- Dr B Von Maydell-Koch, Mr D Bean
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr T Adeloye
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that complaints about events before 17 January 2023 were out of time and that it was not just and equitable to extend time. Those complaints included harassment and direct discrimination related to age, race and/or disability, indirect disability discrimination, and failure to make reasonable adjustments.
The unfair dismissal complaint succeeded. The tribunal found that Royal Mail and Angard did not follow a proper procedure before the second respondent dismissed the claimant, including by not asking other people present on 26 and 27 January 2023 what they saw and heard, and by not adequately addressing inconsistencies in the evidence.
The tribunal dismissed the remaining discrimination and victimisation complaints. It found that Royal Mail and Angard did not discriminate against the claimant because of age, race or disability in the way they treated him on 26 and 27 January 2023 and afterwards, and it reserved remedy for the unfair dismissal complaint to a later hearing.
Claims and outcomes
8 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The complaint was well-founded against the second respondent. Remedy was reserved for a later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Harassment | Complaints relating to events before 17 January 2023 were dismissed as out of time, and complaints relating to events after that date were dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Harassment | Complaints relating to events before 17 January 2023 were dismissed as out of time, and complaints relating to events after that date were dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | Complaints relating to events before 17 January 2023 were dismissed as out of time, and complaints relating to events after that date were dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Age discrimination | Direct discrimination complaints relating to events before 17 January 2023 were dismissed as out of time, and complaints relating to events after that date were dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Race discrimination | Direct discrimination complaints relating to events before 17 January 2023 were dismissed as out of time, and complaints relating to events after that date were dismissed as not well-founded. |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Burchell test
- Polkey
- band of reasonable responses
- para 4 of the Code
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.