Mr Adekunle Soyege v Solicitors Regulation Authority Limited — 2023

The Tribunal (Employment Judge Flood, sitting with Mrs Shenton and Mr Schofield) heard the claimant's consolidated complaints of direct age, race and disability discrimination, indirect disability discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments, age, race and disability related harassment, and victimisation against the Solicitors Regulation Authority Limited over six days in March and April 2023. A substantial portion of the reserved judgment was devoted to procedural history, including determinations about which claim forms had validly been presented and accepted following a series of administrative issues during the Covid 19 period.

On the substantive complaints, the Tribunal found that the claimant had not established that he was a disabled person within the meaning of section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 at the relevant time, so the disability based complaints (direct, indirect and reasonable adjustments) failed on that basis alone. On the direct age and race discrimination complaints, the Tribunal found that the underlying allegations either failed on the facts or fell outside its jurisdiction, and that the claimant had not raised a prima facie case sufficient to shift the burden of proof under s.136 EQA, applying Madarassy v Nomura International. The harassment complaints relied on the same factual allegations and failed for the same reasons.

The Tribunal accepted that the claimant had carried out a protected act by complaining in writing of discrimination on 31 December 2015, but found the victimisation detriment allegations failed for the same jurisdictional and factual reasons. On limitation, the Tribunal indicated that it would have been just and equitable to extend time, so it determined the allegations on their merits or other jurisdictional points rather than refusing them as out of time. All of the claimant's complaints were dismissed.