Case 2602026/2017 · Employment Tribunal

Mr E Nzononye v Elysium Healthcare Ltd — 2018

Case reference: 2602026/2017
Decision date: 20 November 2018
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Blackwell Members
Venue: Lincoln
Panel members: Mr R N Loynes, Ms H Andrews

Indexed: 20 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr E Nzononye

Respondent

Elysium Healthcare Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The unanimous decision of the Tribunal was that the complaint of failure to pay wages succeeded by consent. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Claimant the gross sum of £584.76.

The Tribunal dismissed the Claimant's complaints of direct race discrimination under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 and victimisation under section 27 of the Equality Act 2010. The Tribunal also dismissed the claim of unfair dismissal. The written judgment records that reasons were given orally at the hearing.

Claims and outcomes

4 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unlawful deduction from wages	The judgment describes this as a complaint of failure to pay wages, which succeeded by consent.	Upheld	—	£585
Race discrimination	The judgment describes complaints of direct race discrimination contrary to section 13 of the Equality Act 2010.	Dismissed	Race	—
Victimisation	The judgment describes complaints of victimisation pursuant to section 27 of the Equality Act 2010. The written judgment does not specify a protected characteristic for this claim.	Dismissed	—	—
Unfair dismissal	Recorded from the judgment.	Dismissed	—	—

Remedy

Monetary award

Total award: £585; across all upheld claims

Legal tests applied

2 references

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.

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.