Case 2302337/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Thomas v Team Care Support Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2302337/2021
- Decision date
- 31 December 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Clarke
- Panel members
- Mrs J Jerram, Ms N O'Hare
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Thomas
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant, Mr J Thomas, was employed by Team Care Support Ltd as a Support Worker from 3rd January 2019 until his dismissal effective 29th March 2021. The Respondent contended that the dismissal was for redundancy and/or some other substantial reason linked to a business reorganisation. The Tribunal, sitting at London South (Croydon) before Employment Judge Clarke with Mrs J Jerram and Ms N O'Hare, determined liability only after the parties were not ready to address remedy; a remedy hearing was provisionally listed for 11th March 2024.
The Tribunal found the complaint of unfair dismissal well-founded. The unlawful deduction from wages claim included in the ET1 was struck out at the start of the hearing under Rules 37(1)(d) and (e) as it had not been actively pursued and a fair hearing in respect of it was no longer possible.
The complaint of direct race discrimination was dismissed. The Tribunal concluded that the Claimant had not established a prima facie case: there were clear non-discriminatory reasons for the matters complained of (including the Claimant's communication and processing limitations affecting day-shift allocation, safeguarding-related comments about family members working together, errors on the P45 attributable to typing errors and an unupdated address, and the provision of individualised rotas intended to assist the Claimant). Family members of the same racial group had been allocated day care shifts, and the Tribunal was satisfied that a hypothetical comparator in materially the same circumstances would have been treated the same.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The Tribunal found the complaint of unfair dismissal well-founded. Liability only was determined at this hearing; remedy was deferred to a provisionally listed remedy hearing on 11th March 2024. | Upheld | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The Tribunal found the complaint of direct race discrimination not well-founded. The Claimant did not establish a prima facie case; the Tribunal identified non-discriminatory reasons for the treatment complained of and was not satisfied that a hypothetical comparator would have been treated differently. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The Wages Act claim included in the ET1 was struck out under Employment Tribunal Rules 37(1)(d) and (e) as it had not been actively pursued and a fair hearing was no longer possible. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Employment Tribunal Rules 37(1)(d) and (e)
- Scott & Co v Richardson UKEAT/0074/04
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.