Case 1302875/2022 · Employment Tribunal
MR W RAI v Micro Pathology Limited and 1 other — 2023
- Case reference
- 1302875/2022
- Decision date
- 5 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Kight Representation
Parties
3 namedClaimant
MR W RAI
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a CVP hearing in Birmingham on 2 and 3 May 2023, Employment Judge Kight dealt with strike-out applications under Rule 37(1)(a). The claimant's claims for notice pay, holiday pay and disability discrimination were struck out on the basis that they had no reasonable prospects of success.
The respondents' application to strike out the claimant's direct discrimination and harassment claims based on race and/or religion or belief was refused. The judgment records no substantive merits findings on those claims and no monetary award, so the only recorded outcome is that they were permitted to proceed.
Claims and outcomes
7 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Claim for notice pay struck out under Rule 37(1)(a) as having no reasonable prospects of success. | Struck out | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Claim for holiday pay struck out under Rule 37(1)(a) as having no reasonable prospects of success. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Claim for disability discrimination struck out under Rule 37(1)(a) as having no reasonable prospects of success. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Race discrimination | Respondents' application to strike out the direct discrimination claim relying on race and/or religion or belief was refused; no merits determination was made. | Other | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | Respondents' application to strike out the direct discrimination claim relying on race and/or religion or belief was refused; no merits determination was made. | Other | Religion or belief | — |
| Harassment | Respondents' application to strike out the harassment claim relying on race and/or religion or belief was refused; no merits determination was made. | Other | Race | — |
| Harassment |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 37(1)(a)
- no reasonable prospects of success
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.