Case 2202310/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Morris v One Housing Group Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2202310/2019
- Decision date
- 20 July 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tayler
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Morris
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant did not attend a preliminary hearing for case management on 19 February 2020. The tribunal made an order requiring him to explain the bereavement he had relied on, why he had not sought a postponement, confirm that he was pursuing the claim, and identify the precise Islamophobic comment he alleged a colleague made in December 2018.
An email from the Claimant dated 29 February 2020 was later found to include further attachments. In that material he said he had travelled to Maastricht after being informed of his godmother's death, stated that he had been signed off work with stress from April 2019, said he had resigned from One Housing Group Limited on 16 January 2020 on medical advice, and added that due to his current health he would not pursue the claim. He also said he had contacted ACAS and would complete a COT3.
After administrative delay caused by the Coronavirus Pandemic, the tribunal sent a further letter on 9 July 2020 requiring the outstanding information. The Claimant was directed to respond by 16 July 2020 but did not do so. The tribunal recorded that he had not provided the precise Islamophobic comment alleged in December 2018 and had taken no further steps to pursue the case.
The tribunal therefore struck out the claim on the basis that it had not been actively pursued. No compensation or other remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Religion or belief discrimination | The judgment refers to the Claimant needing to identify the precise Islamophobic comment allegedly made in December 2018. The tribunal did not determine the merits. | Struck out | Religion or belief | — |
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.