Case 2302689/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Toms (Counsel) For the v Respondent — 2021
- Case reference
- 2302689/2019
- Decision date
- 25 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hyams-Parish
- Venue
- London South
- Panel members
- Mr J Matharu, Mr N Aziz
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr N Toms (Counsel) For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal sat at London South Employment Tribunal on 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23 and 24 February 2021 before Employment Judge Hyams-Parish, with members Mr J Matharu and Mr N Aziz. The written record states that the claims against the First Respondent were dismissed upon withdrawal.
It also records that the claim against the Second Respondent for victimisation was dismissed upon withdrawal. The remaining discrimination claims against the Second Respondent failed and were dismissed.
The judgment does not set out substantive written reasons. It states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless a request was made within 14 days of the sending of the written record.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The written record states that the remaining discrimination claims against the Second Respondent failed and were dismissed. It also records that the claims against the First Respondent were dismissed upon withdrawal, but does not separately identify those claims by type in the written record. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The written record states that the remaining discrimination claims against the Second Respondent failed and were dismissed. It also records that the claims against the First Respondent were dismissed upon withdrawal, but does not separately identify those claims by type in the written record. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
| Victimisation | The judgment records that the claim against the Second Respondent for victimisation was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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.