Case 1304566/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Brown v Farley and Jones — 2021
- Case reference
- 1304566/2021
- Decision date
- 16 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dimbylow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K Brown
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy letter dated 8 November 2021, the tribunal told Mr K Brown that it was considering striking out his racial and age discrimination claims because he had not complied with the tribunal's order of 27 October 2021 and because the claims had not been actively pursued. He was given an opportunity to make written representations or request a hearing as to why strike out should not follow.
Mr Brown did not make written representations, or did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out the claims for racial discrimination and age discrimination. The judgment states that the claimant's other claims were unaffected.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The tribunal struck out the racial discrimination claim because the claimant had not complied with the order dated 27 October 2021 and had not actively pursued the claim. A letter dated 8 November 2021 gave the claimant an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing, but no sufficient representations were made. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Age discrimination | The tribunal struck out the age discrimination claim for the same reasons as the racial discrimination claim: non-compliance with the order dated 27 October 2021 and failure to actively pursue the claim. The claimant did not make sufficient representations in response to the 8 November 2021 letter. | Struck out | Age | — |
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.