Ajao v Commerzbank AG & Ors (Anonymity; holiday pay; costs in employment tribunal; costs in the appeal) [2024] EAT 11 (12 February 2024)

Ajao v Commerzbank AG & Ors (Anonymity; holiday pay; costs in employment tribunal; costs in the appeal) [2024] EAT 11 (12 February 2024)

The tribunal was entitled to revoke the anonymity and reporting restriction orders for the claimant because the protection of the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992 did not apply to allegations made solely in employment tribunal proceedings, and the claimant's allegations were found to be false and dishonest, constituting a material change of circumstances. The dismissal of the holiday pay claim and the costs order were both justified on the evidence and in law.

Citation
[2024] EAT 11
Parties
Appellant (claimant Below): Damilare Ajao; Respondent (respondent Below): Commerzbank AG; Respondent (respondent Below): Mr Lars Vogelmann; Respondent (respondent Below): Ms Hope Jackson; Respondent (respondent Below): Mr Gary Booth; Respondent (respondent Below): Ms Yogita Mehta; Respondent (respondent Below): Q (anonymised)
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
12 February 2024
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal Tribunal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Judgment and Consequential Orders
Outcome
Appeal dismissed on all grounds
Legal Topics
Anonymity Orders, Holiday Pay, Costs Orders, Open Justice, Sexual Offences (amendment) Act 1992, Article 8 ECHR, Article 6 ECHR, Employment Tribunal Rules
Employment Law Civil Procedure Human Rights Anonymity Orders Holiday Pay Costs Orders Open Justice Sexual Offences (amendment) Act 1992 +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Damilare Ajao

Appellant (claimant Below)

Commerzbank AG

Respondent (respondent Below)

Mr Lars Vogelmann

Respondent (respondent Below)

Ms Hope Jackson

Respondent (respondent Below)

Mr Gary Booth

Respondent (respondent Below)

Ms Yogita Mehta

Respondent (respondent Below)

Q (anonymised)

Respondent (respondent Below)

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal Tribunal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Judgment and Consequential Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the tribunal erred in revoking anonymity and reporting restriction orders for the claimant
  2. 2 Whether the tribunal erred in dismissing the claimant's holiday pay claim
  3. 3 Whether the tribunal erred or acted perversely in making a costs order against the claimant

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal was entitled to revoke the anonymity and reporting restriction orders for the claimant because the protection of the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992 did not apply to allegations made solely in employment tribunal proceedings, and the claimant's allegations were found to be false and dishonest, constituting a material change of circumstances. The dismissal of the holiday pay claim and the costs order were both justified on the evidence and in law.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed on all grounds

Orders

  • Revocation of anonymity and reporting restriction orders for the claimant upheld
  • Dismissal of holiday pay claim upheld