Case 6017384/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Richard Ojok v Priority One IT Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6017384/2024
- Decision date
- 4 April 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge N Wilson Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Richard Ojok
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at London South by video on 4 April 2025 before Employment Judge N Wilson. The written judgment records that the claimant, Richard Ojok, appeared for himself and that the respondent was represented by Tracy Newman of Malin J. No lay members are listed, and the written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing.
The tribunal dismissed the complaint of breach of contract in relation to notice pay, stating that it was not well founded. It also dismissed the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages, again stating that the claim was not well founded. The judgment separately repeats that the notice pay complaint was not well founded and dismissed. No monetary award is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages was not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Complaint in relation to notice pay; judgment states it was not well founded and dismissed. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.