Case 1401846/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Dr N Arunasalam v University of Plymouth — 2021
- Case reference
- 1401846/2020
- Decision date
- 20 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dawson
- Panel members
- Ms Hewitt-Gray, Ms Skillin
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Dr N Arunasalam
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningDr N Arunasalam, a lecturer in adult nursing at the University of Plymouth, brought claims of direct race discrimination and harassment arising from events between July 2018 and December 2019. The tribunal accepted that she was Asian and from Malaysia, and that she may have been the only non-white member of the School or one of a very small number, but it found that the case turned on a clash of ethos and personality rather than race.
On the direct discrimination allegations, the tribunal rejected the claimant's account that Louise Winfield asked her to withdraw from the ENNE role so it could be given to an English person. It preferred Ms Winfield's evidence and noted that the claimant's account had changed over time. It also found that Suzi Robinson's hostility after dissertation feedback was linked to the academic issues around her MSc work and Dr Arunasalam's role as supervisor and first marker, not to race.
The tribunal further found that Ms Winfield did not disregard the claimant's concerns about Suzi Robinson, that the 12 March 2019 email about the dissertation and mark would have been embarrassing but was not race-related, and that the questions and scrutiny in December 2019 over student support and Tim Needham's extension were reasonable management responses to the situation. The tribunal held that the claimant was being regarded as unreasonable for refusing further support to Mr Needham, and that a white member of staff would have been treated the same way.
On harassment, the tribunal held that the allegations either were not factually made out or, where some unwanted conduct was established, were not related to race. It therefore dismissed the harassment claim as well. Because all claims failed, the tribunal did not need to determine limitation, although it observed that it would not have found good reason for late presentation in relation to matters up to March 2019. The final outcome was that the claims were dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | All six direct race discrimination allegations were dismissed. The tribunal did not accept that Ms Winfield asked Dr Arunasalam to withdraw from the ENNE role, found that Suzi Robinson's conduct was linked to dissertation progress and Dr Arunasalam's role as supervisor/first marker rather than race, and held that Ms Winfield did not disregard the claimant's concerns or treat her differently because she was Asian. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | The harassment claim, brought on the basis of race, was dismissed. The tribunal found that some of the alleged conduct was not factually made out, and that the parts which were established to some extent, including the November 2018 and March 2019 matters, were not related to race. | Dismissed | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- Equality Act 2010 s.13
- Equality Act 2010 s.26
- Equality Act 2010 s.136
- Nagarajan
- Shamoon
- Madarassy
- Hewage
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.