Case 3202333/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Ojji v G4S Secure Solutions (UK) Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 3202333/2019
- Decision date
- 6 April 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Speker OBE
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Ojji
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant worked as a security officer at a DWP site. On 5 July 2019 a member of the public subjected him to racist abuse while seated in the waiting area. The Claimant walked over to the customer and struck him in the face, causing his nose to bleed. The Claimant admitted striking the customer and accepted that it was wrong.
The Tribunal found that the Respondent genuinely believed the Claimant had committed misconduct, had reasonable grounds for that belief, and had carried out a reasonable investigation in the circumstances. It accepted that the racist abuse formed part of the circumstances, but held that the case before it was not a race discrimination case.
Applying section 98(4) and the band of reasonable responses test, the Tribunal found that dismissal for gross misconduct was fair given the nature of the security role, the admitted assault, and the absence of physical danger to the Claimant at the time. It also found that any procedural issues were not sufficient to make the dismissal unfair and that matters were corrected on appeal. For wrongful dismissal, the Tribunal found that the admitted assault amounted to gross misconduct under the contract, so summary dismissal without notice was permitted.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The Tribunal found the Claimant was fairly dismissed for conduct and that dismissal fell within the band of reasonable responses. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The Tribunal found the Claimant's actions amounted to gross misconduct and that the Respondent was entitled to terminate summarily without notice. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract issues concerned investigation, representation, training and notice. The Tribunal did not uphold the alleged contractual breaches. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The race discrimination claim had been withdrawn before the final hearing. A later application to amend to include it again was refused, and the final hearing did not determine a race discrimination claim. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- s.98(1) Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.98(2) Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.98(4) Employment Rights Act 1996
- British Home Stores v Burchell
- Iceland Frozen Foods Limited v Jones
- band of reasonable responses
- HSBC v Madden
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.