Case 1401748/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Ofori consultant For the v Respondent — 2021
- Case reference
- 1401748/2019
- Decision date
- 22 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Truscott QC
- Panel members
- Ms S Khawaja, Mr G Anderson
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr P Ofori consultant For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at London South by CVP on 21 and 22 June 2021, gave a unanimous judgment in which Employment Judge Truscott QC sat with Ms S Khawaja and Mr G Anderson. The claimant was Mr R Agyeman-Prempeh and the respondent was Mears Limited.
The tribunal dismissed the claim of direct race discrimination. It held that the claim, brought under sections 6 and 13 of the Equality Act 2010, was not well founded. The tribunal also dismissed the claim of harassment related to race.
The harassment claim was brought under sections 6 and 26 of the Equality Act 2010 and was also found not well founded. No remedy or monetary award was recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination contrary to sections 6 and 13 of the Equality Act 2010 was found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | Harassment related to race, contrary to sections 6 and 26 of the Equality Act 2010, was found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.