Case 6025332/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Apinke Solaja v Royal Mail Group Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 6025332/2025
- Decision date
- 4 June 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Evans Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Apinke Solaja
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningApinke Solaja's complaint that she was unfairly dismissed by Royal Mail Group Ltd was struck out. The tribunal applied section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, which requires at least two years’ service to bring an unfair dismissal complaint, and found that the claimant had been employed by the respondent for less than two years.
The tribunal found that the claimant had not provided an acceptable reason, despite being given an opportunity to do so, why the complaint should not be struck out. It recorded that the claimant's other complaints were unaffected by the judgment and that the strike-out did not itself prevent her from arguing that her dismissal was an act of race and/or sex discrimination. No remedy was recorded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claimant's other complaints were not affected by this judgment. The tribunal stated that striking out the unfair dismissal claim did not prevent her from arguing that her dismissal was an act of race and/or sex discrimination. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.