Case 1406618/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Fabio Serci v Padstow Harbour Hotel Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 1406618/2020
- Decision date
- 8 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Halliday Members
- Venue
- Bristol
- Panel members
- Ms R. Clarke, Ms R. Hewitt-Gray
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Fabio Serci
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at Bristol before Employment Judge Halliday with lay members Ms R. Clarke and Ms R. Hewitt-Gray, heard the case on 21, 22, 23 and 24 March 2022. The claimant, Fabio Serci, appeared in person and the respondent was represented by counsel. The tribunal said its judgment was unanimous.
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's complaints of automatically unfair dismissal relating to health and safety complaints and protected disclosures, and dismissed his complaint of direct race discrimination. The written record does not set out the tribunal's full reasons because reasons were given orally at the hearing, and the record notes that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in time.
No monetary award is recorded in the written judgment, and no remedy is specified in the extracted text. The tribunal's decision as recorded is therefore limited to dismissal of all three complaints.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Automatically unfair dismissal claim relating to health and safety complaints. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Automatically unfair dismissal claim relating to protected disclosures. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination claim. | 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.