Case 1601779/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Fontella v Tesco Stores Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 1601779/2020
- Decision date
- 10 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dated
- Venue
- By Telephone
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Fontella
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records the tribunal's decision on the claimant's application to amend his claim, dated 25 February 2021. The application was allowed in part, including amendments to assert victimisation concerning alleged events after 28 May 2020, four alleged acts of direct discrimination/victimisation on or after 22 January 2021, and other amendments in section 4 of the application except those expressly refused.
The tribunal refused the proposed amendments concerning a 2016 allegation, alleged discriminatory comments about the claimant's appearance on 13 May 2020, alleged swearing on 17 May 2020, unspecified alleged inappropriate comments on 1 June 2020, and a July 2020 allegation that the claimant was told there were no racists in the store where he worked.
The judgment also records that, following withdrawal by the claimant, the claims of sex discrimination, religious discrimination and disability discrimination were dismissed. No remedy was awarded in this judgment, and the written record states that oral reasons had been given at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Victimisation | The tribunal allowed in part an application to amend the claim to assert victimisation in respect of alleged events after 28 May 2020, and to assert four acts of direct discrimination/victimisation on or after 22 January 2021. This was an amendment decision, not a merits determination. | Other | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | Upon withdrawal by the claimant, the claim of sex discrimination was dismissed. | Withdrawn | Sex | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | Upon withdrawal by the claimant, the claim of religious discrimination was dismissed. | Withdrawn | Religion or belief | — |
| Disability discrimination | Upon withdrawal by the claimant, the claim of disability discrimination was dismissed. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Other | The tribunal allowed some requested amendments and refused others. The order does not identify a final merits outcome for the remaining underlying claims. | Other | — | — |
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.