Case 2300796/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Olokodana v South West London & St Georges Mental Health NHS Trust OPEN PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2023
- Case reference
- 2300796/2022
- Decision date
- 16 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Truscott KC
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Olokodana
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was an open preliminary hearing on 16 March 2023 before Employment Judge Truscott KC at London South. The claimant, Mr N Olokodana, had worked for the respondent as a clinical charge nurse from 15 March 2011 until his resignation and the expiry of his notice period on 6 December 2021. The tribunal recorded that the case was one of constructive unfair dismissal. The respondent applied for strike out or, alternatively, a deposit order on the basis that the claim had no or little reasonable prospect of success.
The respondent relied in particular on the resignation letter of 19 October 2021 and an email in which the claimant sought to withdraw his resignation. It submitted that, on that material, a fundamental breach could not be established. The claimant disputed the submissions and said he could not recall saying what he had been noted as saying to the previous tribunal.
The tribunal decided not to hear evidence from the claimant at this stage. It held that, for strike out purposes, the claimant's case had to be taken at its highest and that there might be a context for the documents relied on which could lead to a different interpretation. It noted that the resignation letter and request to return were not determinative by themselves. On that basis, the respondent's application was refused. The reasons state that the claimant's evidence would be heard at a full merits hearing listed for 17 to 19 May 2023.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Preliminary hearing only. The respondent's application for strike out or, alternatively, a deposit order was refused; the substantive constructive unfair dismissal claim was listed for a full merits hearing. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- no reasonable prospects of success
- little reasonable prospect of success
- claim must be taken at its highest
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.