Case 1807402/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Younis v Northern Gas Networks Operations Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 1807402/2020
- Decision date
- 26 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shepherd Members
- Venue
- Leeds
- Panel members
- Mr T Downes, Mr K Smith
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Younis
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr Younis, worked as a Customer Care Officer and complained that his move from Bradford to Leeds in January 2019 and from Leeds to Pontefract in July 2019 was racially motivated. The tribunal found that the Bradford patch required only one CCO, that a decision was taken that he would transfer, and that there was no credible evidence that either transfer was because of race. It also found that the complaints about those transfers were substantially out of time and that there was no conduct extending over a period or basis for a just and equitable extension.
The tribunal accepted that on 8 July 2020 an MCC employee used extremely offensive racial language in the claimant's presence. It found that, whether the words were 'Fucking Paki' or a reference to a 'Paki shop', they would amount to harassment. However, the harassment complaint based on that incident was one day out of time, and the tribunal declined to extend time. It also found that the respondent was not responsible for the MCC employee's conduct and had done what it reasonably could after the incident, including contacting MCC, obtaining an apology, and being told that race equality briefing had taken place.
A further harassment allegation concerned Mr Russ Kaye's use of the phrase 'corner shop' during the disciplinary process. The tribunal found that this wording was an attempt to avoid using the racial slur and that, taking account of the claimant's perception and the circumstances, it was not reasonable for the conduct to have the effect of violating his dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. The victimisation claim also failed: although the claimant had done a protected act by reporting the racist comment, the tribunal found no evidence that the later comments by staff or JW were because of that protected act, and it held that the respondent was not liable for MCC employees in any event.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination complaints about the Bradford-to-Leeds transfer in January 2019, the Leeds-to-Pontefract transfer in July 2019, and the handling of racism complaints were dismissed. The tribunal found no credible evidence that the transfers were because of race, found the allegations substantially out of time, and was not satisfied it was just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | The tribunal accepted that the words used by the MCC employee on 8 July 2020 were extremely offensive and would amount to harassment, but the complaint was one day out of time and no extension was granted. The separate allegation about Mr Russ Kaye's use of 'corner shop' was found not to be harassment because, taking account of the claimant's perception and the circumstances, it was not reasonable for the conduct to have the alleged effect. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Victimisation | The tribunal accepted that the claimant had done a protected act by reporting the racist comment, and accepted that unnamed staff and JW made the alleged comments. It found no evidence that the comments were because of the protected act and held that the respondent was not liable for the acts of MCC employees. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
15 references- section 13 Equality Act 2010
- section 26 Equality Act 2010
- section 27 Equality Act 2010
- section 123 Equality Act 2010
- section 136 Equality Act 2010
- Igen v Wong
- Madarassy v Nomura International plc
- Shamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary
- Chief Constable of the West Yorkshire Police v Khan
- Nagarajan v London Regional Transport
- Strathclyde Regional Council v Zafar
- Law Society v Bahl
- South London Healthcare NHS Trust v Al-Rubeyi
- Martin v Devonshires Solicitors
- O'Donoghue v Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council
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.