Cases6010897/2025

Claimant v National Crime Agency

13 November 2025Before Employment Judge HeydonLondon Centralremote video

Outcome

Partly successful

Individual claims

Otherstruck out

The tribunal struck out the claim for refusal or unlawful act in relation to a flexible working request under s80G/H ERA 1996 on grounds that it had no reasonable prospect of success following a preliminary hearing.

Detrimentstruck out

The tribunal struck out the claim for detriment for making a flexible working request under s47E ERA 1996 on grounds that it had no reasonable prospect of success following a preliminary hearing.

Direct Discriminationstruck out

The tribunal struck out discrimination claims (with the exception of allegations relating to continued surveillance after 5 March 2025) on grounds that they had no reasonable prospect of success. The remaining surveillance allegation was not struck out and will proceed.

Harassmentstruck out

The tribunal struck out harassment claims (with the exception of allegations relating to continued surveillance after 5 March 2025) on grounds that they had no reasonable prospect of success. The remaining surveillance allegation was not struck out and will proceed.

Facts

Mr Oyoo brought claims against the National Crime Agency including flexible working request claims, detriment for making such a request, and discrimination and harassment claims. The case involved allegations of surveillance of the claimant, with specific allegations continuing after 5 March 2025. The respondent applied to strike out various aspects of the claim at a preliminary hearing.

Decision

The tribunal struck out the flexible working request claims under s80G/H and s47E ERA 1996, and most discrimination and harassment claims on grounds of no reasonable prospect of success. However, the tribunal allowed the discrimination and harassment allegations relating to continued surveillance after 5 March 2025 to proceed.

Practical note

Not all claims in a discrimination case need be struck out together - tribunals can and will allow specific factual allegations with reasonable prospects to proceed while striking out others that do not meet the threshold.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.80GERA 1996 s.80HERA 1996 s.47E

Case details

Case number
6010897/2025
Decision date
13 November 2025
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Name
National Crime Agency
Sector
emergency services
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Claimant representation

Represented
No