Case 3313225/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Egbe v London School of Science and Technology Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 3313225/2020
- Decision date
- 22 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bartlett Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Egbe
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 21 September 2022, the claimant was required to identify the protected act relied on for his victimisation complaint under s.27 of the Equality Act 2010. He identified an email dated 29 June 2020.
The tribunal concluded that the email could not possibly be construed as an allegation that anyone had contravened the Equality Act 2010. On that basis, it found there was no reasonable prospect of the victimisation complaint succeeding and struck it out.
The reasons record that the claimant maintained his position, but he was unable to point to any language in the email that would support the asserted protected act. The extract also states that the claimant's remaining claims were heard at the hearing between 20 and 22 September 2022, but it does not record the outcome of those claims.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Victimisation | Struck out at hearing on 21 September 2022 because the claimant's relied-upon email of 29 June 2020 could not be read as alleging a contravention of the Equality Act 2010, so there was no reasonable prospect of satisfying s.27 Equality Act 2010. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.27 Equality Act 2010
- no reasonable prospect of success
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.