Case 2200388/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Bartosz Moscichowski v Open House London Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2200388/2023
- Decision date
- 8 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anthony
- Venue
- London Central
- Panel members
- Dr V Weerasinghe, Mr S Williams
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Bartosz Moscichowski
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at London Central Employment Tribunal by Employment Judge Anthony sitting with Dr V Weerasinghe and Mr S Williams, with the claimant appearing in person and the respondent represented by a solicitor. The tribunal unanimously dismissed Mr Bartosz Moscichowski's complaint of direct discrimination because of race under the Equality Act 2010.
The tribunal also dealt with a victimisation complaint under the Equality Act 2010. It recorded that the complaint was brought within the three-month time limit running from the date of the act complained of, and then held that the victimisation complaint succeeded. The extracted judgment does not set out any further reasoning or any remedy award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Complaint of direct discrimination because of race under the Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Victimisation | The tribunal recorded that this complaint was brought within the three-month time limit and then held that the victimisation complaint succeeded. | Upheld | 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.