Case 2202617/2020 · Employment Tribunal

P Berko v Mitie Limited Heard remotely:(London Central) — 2021

Case reference: 2202617/2020
Decision date: 29 November 2021
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Henderson Representation

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

P Berko

Respondent

Mitie Limited Heard remotely:(London Central)

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The claimant applied to amend his case to add direct race discrimination complaints under section 13 Equality Act 2010. Those amended claims alleged that his dismissal on 19 December 2019 was because of race, that the respondent had turned a blind eye to complaints in September 2019 that his manager had shouted at him, and that the respondent had failed to give him and other black colleagues a pay rise. The respondent said the dismissal and complaint-based claims were out of time under section 123 Equality Act 2010, and the tribunal left the jurisdiction and time-limit issues for the final hearing listed for June or July 2022.

Employment Judge Henderson recorded that the respondent's application concerning the pay-rise race discrimination claim was refused because neither side had provided the relevant evidence to enable the tribunal to determine that matter. The judgment did not finally determine the merits of the amended direct race discrimination claims; it left the jurisdiction questions to the final hearing.

The claimant withdrew any claims for automatically unfair dismissal and indirect race discrimination. Insofar as those claims were properly pleaded, the tribunal dismissed them. No monetary award was made in this judgment.

Claims and outcomes

5 findings recorded

This case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Race discrimination	Amended direct race discrimination claim that the claimant's dismissal on 19 December 2019 was because of race, including an allegation that his role was given to a white colleague (LL). The respondent said the claim was out of time; the tribunal left the jurisdiction/time-limit issue for the final hearing.	Other	Race	—
Race discrimination	Amended direct race discrimination claim that the respondent turned a blind eye to complaints in September 2019 that the claimant's manager had shouted at him and that he believed this was because of race. The jurisdiction/time-limit issue was left for the final hearing.	Other	Race	—
Race discrimination	Direct race discrimination claim relating to the respondent's failure to give the claimant and other black colleagues a pay rise. The respondent's application on this point was refused because neither side had provided the relevant evidence, and jurisdiction was left for the final hearing.	Other	Race	—
Unfair dismissal	The claimant withdrew any claims for automatically unfair dismissal; insofar as those claims were properly pleaded, the tribunal dismissed them.	Withdrawn	—	—
Race discrimination	The claimant withdrew any indirect race discrimination claim; insofar as it was properly pleaded, the tribunal dismissed it.

Legal tests applied

2 references

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.

Open official judgment 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.