Case 6007653/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Efevawere-Onowotu v Nexus Programme Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6007653/2024
- Decision date
- 11 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sean Jones
- Venue
- London South ET and
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Efevawere-Onowotu
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal considered a wrongful dismissal claim arising from the claimant's summary dismissal. It set out the contractual notice terms, the disciplinary procedure, and the principles concerning repudiatory breach, summary dismissal, and contractual disciplinary processes.
The tribunal concluded that the respondent had not offered the claimant a fair disciplinary hearing because he was given effectively no notice and had not received documents setting out the precise allegations or investigation material. It also found a further breach of contract because the appeal should not have been dealt with on paper in the circumstances.
The claimant's wrongful dismissal claim succeeded. The tribunal awarded one week's net pay for the failure to afford a disciplinary hearing, made no award for the failure to afford an appeal hearing, and directed the parties to agree the value of one week's net pay or make submissions if they could not agree.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal held that the wrongful dismissal claim succeeded and awarded one week's net pay, but the judgment excerpt does not state a monetary figure. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- repudiatory breach of contract
- Duty of Mutual Trust and Confidence
- Morrow v Safeway Stores plc [2002] ICR 77 EAT
- Sasha Burn v Alder Hey Children's NHS Foundation Trust [2021] EWCA Civ 1791
- Lavarack v Woods of Colchester Limited [1967] 1 QB 278
- Gunton v Richmond-upon-Thames Borough Council [1980] ICR 755
- Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994, Paragraph 3(c)
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.