Case 2400252/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr F Nyawara v Svella Connect Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 2400252/2024
- Decision date
- 29 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Slater
- Panel members
- Ms J K Williamson, Mr P Dobson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr F Nyawara
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Manchester by video on 22 to 25 June 2025 before Employment Judge Slater, Ms J K Williamson and Mr P Dobson. The claimant, Mr F Nyawara, appeared in person and the respondent, Svella Connect Limited, was represented by Mr A Mohamed, solicitor.
The tribunal's unanimous judgment was that the complaints of direct race discrimination were not well founded and the complaint of wrongful dismissal was not well founded. No written reasons are included in the judgment record provided; it states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
The judgment also records that the holiday pay complaint was dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant. No monetary award is recorded in the judgment text provided.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The judgment records that the complaints of direct race discrimination were not well founded. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment records that the complaint of wrongful dismissal was not well founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment records that the holiday pay complaint was dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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.