Case 1403761/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Falcao, solicitor The v Mr Taylor, solicitor — 2019
- Case reference
- 1403761/2018
- Decision date
- 7 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Goraj Members
- Venue
- Exeter
- Panel members
- Mrs S Richards, Mr I Ley
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Falcao, solicitor The
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal gave a unanimous judgment on 1 August 2019 and awarded the claimant £11,000 by way of injury to feelings under section 124(6) of the Equality Act 2010. The respondents, BBQ Kebab House (South West) Limited and Mr A Hussain, were ordered to pay that sum jointly and severally.
The tribunal also recorded an agreed award of £981.26 for interest under the Employment Tribunals (Interest on Awards in Discrimination Cases) Regulations 1996, again on a joint and several basis. The total award was therefore £11,981.26.
The short written judgment does not set out the underlying liability findings or the tribunal's reasoning on the substantive claim; it states that reasons were announced orally at the hearing and that written reasons would only be provided if requested within 14 days. It also records that the Rule 50 anonymity order would continue and that the claimant would remain known as XY.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | The judgment records an award of injury to feelings under section 124(6) of the Equality Act 2010 on a joint and several basis. It does not set out the underlying liability reasons in the text provided; those reasons were announced orally. | Upheld | Sex | £11,000 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £11,981
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 124(6) Equality Act 2010
- Employment Tribunals (Interest on Awards in Discrimination Cases) Regulations 1996
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.