Case 6000503/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Savas Coban v Leicester College — 2025
- Case reference
- 6000503/2024
- Decision date
- 27 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge McTigue
- Venue
- Leicester
- Panel members
- Ms Wills, Ms Pratt
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Savas Coban
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Leicester on 3, 4, 5 and 6 November 2025 before Employment Judge McTigue, with Ms Wills and Ms Pratt sitting as members. The claimant, Mr Savas Coban, appeared in person and the respondent, Leicester College, was represented by counsel. The tribunal dismissed the complaint of constructive unfair dismissal as not well founded and also dismissed the complaint of failure to make reasonable adjustments as not well founded.
The written record contains no reasons beyond those announced orally at the hearing. It records that the claimant is to pay a contribution towards the respondent's costs in the sum of £100 by 4 December 2025. The notes state that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the sending of the written record.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment describes the complaint as constructive unfair dismissal and states that it was not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The complaint of failure to make reasonable adjustments was found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.