Case 6002314/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs A L A Owita v GXO Logistics UK Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6002314/2023
- Decision date
- 29 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hutchinson Members
- Venue
- Nottingham Heard
- Panel members
- Mr C Tansley, Miss D Newton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs A L A Owita
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal, sitting with Employment Judge Hutchinson and two lay members, heard the case at Nottingham by CVP on 7, 8 and 9 July 2025. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by a solicitor.
The unanimous judgment was that the claimant's claims of direct discrimination on the grounds of race failed and were dismissed. The claimant's claim of victimisation also failed and was dismissed.
The judgment records that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would only be provided if requested. The written record does not set out factual findings or the tribunal's reasoning beyond the stated dismissal of the claims.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The judgment records that the claims of direct discrimination on the grounds of race failed and were dismissed. Written reasons are not included in the supplied judgment. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Victimisation | The judgment records that the victimisation claim failed and was dismissed. Written reasons are not included in the supplied judgment. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.