Case 1403072/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P. Simbol v John Lewis plc and 5 others — 2023
- Case reference
- 1403072/2022
- Decision date
- 31 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Le Grys
Parties
7 namedClaimant
Mr P. Simbol
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing, the claimant confirmed that the allegations at paragraphs 3-11 of the agreed schedule of claims were not pursued as freestanding claims and formed background narrative only. Those allegations were dismissed on withdrawal.
The tribunal struck out the claims of race discrimination, victimisation and harassment in allegations 12 and 13-28 because they were identical to matters previously determined in the claimant's earlier claim 1401601/2021, or should have been included in that claim. The tribunal also stated, in the alternative, that those claims were out of time and that it would not be just and equitable to extend time.
The tribunal struck out the claims of race discrimination, victimisation, harassment, and instructing, causing or inducing contraventions in allegations 29-30 because they had no reasonable prospect of success. The judgment records that all claims under this claim number were therefore dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Race discrimination claims in allegations 12 and 13-28 were struck out because they were identical to matters previously determined in claim 1401601/2021 or should have been included in that claim; alternatively they were out of time and time was not extended. Race discrimination claims in allegations 29-30 were struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Victimisation | Victimisation claims in allegations 12 and 13-28 were struck out because they were identical to matters previously determined in claim 1401601/2021 or should have been included in that claim; alternatively they were out of time and time was not extended. Victimisation claims in allegations 29-30 were struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | — | — |
| Harassment | Harassment claims in allegations 12 and 13-28 were struck out because they were identical to matters previously determined in claim 1401601/2021 or should have been included in that claim; alternatively they were out of time and time was not extended. Harassment claims in allegations 29-30 were struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Other | Claims of instructing, causing, or inducing contraventions in allegations 29-30 were struck out on the basis that they had no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- just and equitable to extend time
- no reasonable prospect of success
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.