Case 2203161/2020 · Employment Tribunal
in person For the v Respondent — 2022
- Case reference
- 2203161/2020
- Decision date
- 11 March 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge P Klimov Tribunal
- Panel members
- D Keyms, D Shaw
Parties
1 namedClaimant
in person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at London Central by Employment Judge P Klimov with Tribunal Members D Keyms and D Shaw on 9, 10 and 11 March 2022. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Mr S. Proffitt of Counsel.
The tribunal refused the claimant's application to strike out the respondent's response. It then held that all of the claimant's claims failed and were dismissed. The short written record does not set out separate findings on each claim, but the result recorded is a complete dismissal of the claimant's case.
The judgment notes that reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested. No monetary award is recorded in the judgment text.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment text states only that all the claimant's claims failed and were dismissed. The unfair dismissal claim type is inferred from the case listing rather than named in the short judgment text. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment text states only that all the claimant's claims failed and were dismissed. The race discrimination claim type is inferred from the case listing rather than named in the short judgment text. | Dismissed | 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.
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.