Case 4102620/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr E Bayo v Ministry of Defence — 2019
- Case reference
- 4102620/2019
- Decision date
- 22 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Buckley REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr E Bayo
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that all of the claimant's claims were brought outside the relevant time limit.
The tribunal decided that it was not just and equitable to extend the time limit. On that basis, all of the claimant's claims were dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The judgment states that all claims were brought outside the relevant time limit and that it was not just and equitable to extend time. The extracted judgment text does not set out the individual allegations; classification follows the listed case category. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The judgment states that all claims were brought outside the relevant time limit and that it was not just and equitable to extend time. The extracted judgment text does not set out the individual allegations; classification follows the listed case category. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- just and equitable extension of time
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.