Case 2200921/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2019
- Case reference
- 2200921/2019
- Decision date
- 3 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge E Burns
- Venue
- London Central
- Panel members
- Mr D Kendall, Mr I Mcloughlin
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal unanimously upheld Mr Thompson's unfair dismissal claim against Openreach Limited. It also recorded that the claimant's direct race discrimination claim was not upheld. The judgment gives no further reasons on the discrimination issue in the extracted text.
The tribunal upheld the claim for unauthorised deduction from wages/breach of contract after the respondent conceded liability during the course of the liability hearing. No remedy was fixed in this judgment. The tribunal directed that remedy would be considered at a separate remedy hearing on 22 October 2019.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment records this as a direct race discrimination claim. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment refers to this as a claim for unauthorised deduction from wages/breach of contract, which was upheld after the respondent conceded liability during the hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.