Mrs E Ogueh-Etan v Hurstmere School — 2026

Case reference: 2303124/2024
Decision date: 3 July 2026
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Abbott
Venue: London South
Panel members: Mrs R Effeny, Mr M Cann

Indexed: 22 July 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mrs E Ogueh-Etan

Respondent

Hurstmere School

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

Mrs E Ogueh-Etan's complaint of unfair dismissal was found not well-founded and dismissed. Her complaints of direct race discrimination were also found not well-founded and dismissed.

The complaints concerning wages, framed as unlawful deductions from wages or alternatively breach of contract, were found not well-founded and dismissed. The judgment records no monetary award or other remedy. Summary reasons were given orally at the hearing, and the written judgment does not set out the Tribunal's underlying factual findings or legal reasoning.

Claims and outcomes

4 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	Recorded from the judgment.	Dismissed	—	—
Race discrimination	The judgment describes the claims as complaints of direct race discrimination.	Dismissed	Race	—
Unlawful deduction from wages	Pleaded in the alternative to breach of contract in respect of wages.	Dismissed	—	—
Breach of contract	The wages claim was pleaded alternatively as breach of contract.	Dismissed	—	—

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.