Case 3313755/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Dr C Agbo v North West Anglia NHS Foundation Trust — 2026
- Case reference
- 3313755/2023
- Decision date
- 24 March 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge French
- Venue
- Watford
- Panel members
- Mr R Allan, Ms S Laurence-Doig
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Dr C Agbo
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent conceded that the claimant's dismissal was procedurally unfair because, had the Trust appreciated that he had reached two years of service on 30 June 2023, it was likely that his contract would have been extended for a further period in which he would have obtained CESR accreditation. The Tribunal therefore recorded that the unfair dismissal complaint succeeded and directed that remedy would be addressed separately if not agreed.
The Tribunal dismissed the direct race discrimination complaint. It found, on the remaining allegations it determined, that the evidence did not show less favourable treatment because of race, including in relation to the termination of the locum contract, shortlisting for the consultant nephrologist post, removal from consultant systems or lists, and the composition of the selection panel.
Because the race discrimination complaint failed on its merits, the Tribunal did not determine the limitation issues. No monetary remedy was awarded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The respondent conceded that the dismissal was procedurally unfair. The Tribunal stated that remedy would be listed separately if not agreed. | Upheld | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The claimant described his race as black, African, and of Nigerian nationality. Two pleaded race discrimination allegations were withdrawn during the hearing; the remaining direct race discrimination complaint was dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 98 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 123 Equality Act 2010
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.