Kuda Wins UK Tribunal Case as Claims by Former Chief People Officer Are Dismissed -

A UK employment tribunal has dismissed all claims of discrimination and unfair dismissal brought against Nigerian fintech company Kuda by its former Chief People Officer, Rosemary Hewat.

The ruling follows a lawsuit filed in February 2025, in which Hewat accused Kuda of gender-based discrimination, unfair treatment, and wrongful termination. The case focused on events that occurred between 2023 and 2024 and included allegations of public humiliation, a hostile work environment, and unequal treatment in the allocation of employee stock options.

In its judgment, delivered between October 13 and 21, 2025, the Tribunal concluded that all the claims were unfounded after reviewing evidence presented by both parties.

One allegation centred on claims that senior leadership made derogatory remarks about Hewat’s background during a company retreat. The Tribunal rejected this claim, finding that comments made by Kuda’s Group CEO were related to logistical issues around accommodation and were part of routine management feedback, not hostile or discriminatory conduct.

Another claim involved internal tensions between Hewat and a colleague, including an alleged instruction to “make him like her.” The Tribunal determined that the statement was part of a broader conflict resolution approach applied across the team and was neither targeted nor inappropriate.

Hewat also alleged she had been promised a more favourable stock option strike price comparable to that of a male colleague based on a Series A valuation. However, the Tribunal found that official documentation clearly reflected a Series B strike price and that there was no evidence she had been misled.

On the issue of gender-based preferential treatment, the Tribunal noted that the repricing of a male colleague’s stock options was linked to his critical role in fundraising activities, rather than his gender.

Hewat further argued that her dismissal was retaliatory, following her request to revise her stock option terms. The Tribunal rejected this claim, concluding that her role was eliminated as part of a legitimate organisational restructuring. The decision was attributed to cost-cutting measures and role consolidation, not retaliation or discrimination.