In person For the v Respondent — 2019

The claimant had previously brought an unfair dismissal complaint, but that was dismissed on withdrawal at a preliminary hearing after she accepted she did not have qualifying service. The substantive hearing then considered direct race discrimination and alleged sexual harassment arising from events at the Silver Cross pub in October and November 2018.

On the race discrimination claim, the tribunal accepted that Mr Lancaster-Smith asked for the claimant's National Insurance number at interview, but found that this was because he was required to do so. It rejected the allegation that he said 'no black here', treating that account as inconsistent with the claimant's earlier complaint email and inherently implausible. The tribunal found that the real reason for the termination of employment was that Mr Lancaster-Smith had observed the claimant arguing with Mr Krzyzanowski and refusing to accept instruction, including over preparing the pudding order.

On the harassment claim, the tribunal did not accept that the alleged incidents occurred. It found inconsistencies between the claimant's claim form and her oral evidence about whether there had been physical touching, and considered it significant that she had not complained about sexual harassment in her contemporaneous email after dismissal. The tribunal therefore rejected the allegations relating to the Wi-Fi training session and the warning about leggings, and held that the claims failed.

The tribunal dismissed the remaining claims in full and made no award of compensation.