Case 1404249/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In person (assisted by a Court appointed translator Ms B Matusik) For the v Mr R Jones (director) — 2021
- Case reference
- 1404249/2019
- Decision date
- 10 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gray Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person (assisted by a Court appointed translator Ms B Matusik) For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Gray held that Mr M Ksiazek was a contract worker within the meaning of section 41 of the Equality Act 2010. On that basis, his race discrimination complaints were permitted to continue. The judgment did not determine the merits of those complaints in this decision.
The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal complaint and the complaint about failure to provide written particulars of employment. The First Respondent was dismissed from the proceedings. No monetary remedy was assessed in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The tribunal held that the claimant was a contract worker within the meaning of section 41 of the Equality Act 2010, so his race discrimination complaints could continue. The merits were not determined in this judgment. | Other | Race | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Complaint for failure to provide written particulars of employment. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.