Case 2304209/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Amara Agili-Odion v Royal Borough of Greenwich — 2025
- Case reference
- 2304209/2023
- Decision date
- 19 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tueje
- Venue
- London South
- Panel members
- Mr Rogers, Mr Sheath
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Amara Agili-Odion
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that the claimant brought complaints of direct race discrimination, harassment related to sex, and victimisation against the Royal Borough of Greenwich.
The judgment states that each complaint was not well-founded and was dismissed. The text records that reasons were given orally at the hearing, and no written reasons are included in the available judgment unless requested under the stated procedure.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The judgment states that the complaint of direct race discrimination was not well-founded and was dismissed. Reasons were given orally and no written reasons are included in the text. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | The judgment states that the complaint of harassment related to sex was not well-founded and was dismissed. Reasons were given orally and no written reasons are included in the text. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Victimisation | The judgment states that the complaint of victimisation was not well-founded and was dismissed. Reasons were given orally and no written reasons are included in the text. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.