Case 1801795/2020 · Employment Tribunal
In Person v Cordant Security Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 1801795/2020
- Decision date
- 25 September 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wedderspoon Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In Person
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal heard the claim by telephone on 15 September 2020. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent did not attend.
The Tribunal found that the claimant's claim of direct race discrimination dismissal, contrary to sections 13 and 39(2)(c) of the Equality Act 2010, was well founded and succeeded.
No remedy was assessed in the judgment. The claimant was directed to provide a schedule of loss addressing injury to feelings, net monthly wages, any benefits received since dismissal, and when he was likely to obtain alternative employment. The Tribunal stated that losses would be assessed on the basis of that schedule and any representations from the respondent.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The judgment describes the claim as direct race discrimination dismissal contrary to sections 13 and 39(2)(c) of the Equality Act 2010. Remedy was not assessed in this judgment and was to be determined after a schedule of loss and any respondent representations. | Upheld | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 13 Equality Act 2010
- section 39(2)(c) Equality Act 2010
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.