Case 1802430/2019 · Employment Tribunal

Mr B Hussain v R1. Mr John Brooks R2. Capita Retail Finance Services Ltd — 2019

Case reference: 1802430/2019
Decision date: 23 July 2019
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Rogerson Dated

Indexed: 22 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr B Hussain

Respondent

R1. Mr John Brooks R2. Capita Retail Finance Services Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

Employment Judge Rogerson’s written record, dated 23 July 2019, states that the claims against the first respondent, Mr John Brooks, were dismissed following a withdrawal by the claimant. The judgment does not set out any merits findings, legal analysis, or monetary award in relation to those claims.

The same judgment records that the claims against the second respondent, Capita Retail Finance Services Ltd, were to proceed to a hearing on 16 September 2019. No panel members, legal tests, or remedy figures are identified in the supplied text.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Race discrimination	The judgment records that the claims against the first respondent were dismissed following a withdrawal by the claimant. The individual claim types are not specified in the judgment text; this claim type is recorded from the case context listing category for race discrimination.	Withdrawn	Race	—
Other	The judgment records that the claims against the first respondent were dismissed following a withdrawal by the claimant. The individual claim type is not specified in the judgment text; this entry records the separate non-discrimination issue referenced in the case context as right to be accompanied.	Withdrawn	—	—

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.