Case 1302955/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L J MALUKA v Brake Bros Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 1302955/2024
- Decision date
- 19 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Murdin
- Venue
- Midlands West
- Panel members
- Mr E Stanley, Mr N Howard
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr L J MALUKA
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records that the claimant, Mr L J Maluka, brought claims against Brake Bros Limited for direct discrimination, victimisation and unpaid wages. The hearing took place at Midlands West Employment Tribunal on 12, 13, 15 and 16 May 2025 before Employment Judge Murdin, Mr E Stanley and Mr N Howard.
The tribunal dismissed all three claims. The extracted text does not set out the tribunal's detailed reasoning, findings of fact, or any remedy award, and it does not record any partial success on any issue.
The judgment was signed by Employment Judge Murdin on 19 May 2025. No legal tests are named in the extracted text, and no monetary award is stated.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The extracted judgment text states only 'direct discrimination' and does not name the protected characteristic; classified as race in line with the case listing and the stated Race Discrimination category. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Victimisation | The extracted text records the claim as 'victimisation' without setting out any further detail or associated protected characteristic. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment describes this head of claim as 'unpaid wages' and dismisses it. | 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.