And v Mr J Johnson and 8 others — 2023

The tribunal listed the claims as direct race discrimination, harassment and victimisation. The hearing was due to last 10 days, but the claimant left about five minutes after proceedings began on 28 March 2023, before evidence was taken or he was sworn in. He later emailed that he had suffered a mental breakdown and would not be able to take part for at least a month, but the tribunal noted there was no supporting medical evidence and treated the explanation as unsubstantiated.

On the Rule 47 issue, the tribunal found that the claimant’s brief presence did not amount to meaningful attendance and that his departure was abrupt and unexplained. It also relied on the earlier correspondence about his stated unwillingness to attend an in-person hearing, the lack of medical evidence, and the absence of any indication that his position would change. For those reasons it dismissed the claims for non-attendance.

In the alternative, the tribunal held that the claims had no reasonable prospect of success and that the proceedings had been conducted in an unreasonable and vexatious manner. It found that the claimant’s 27 discrimination complaints and six victimisation complaints arose from minor workplace issues rather than from race, and it rejected the suggestion that matters such as an iPad with 3G rather than 4G were racially discriminatory. The tribunal said the witness evidence and contemporaneous documents did not support an inference of race discrimination, harassment or victimisation.

The tribunal also recorded that several respondents had supported the claimant, responded professionally, and dealt with his grievance appropriately, while some others had only peripheral involvement. It referred to earlier tribunal proceedings brought by the claimant as part of the broader assessment of conduct, but the claims in this case were dismissed on the combination of non-attendance and lack of merit. No monetary remedy was awarded.