Case 2303099/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S T D Shek v Mr M Wrack and 1 other — 2023
- Case reference
- 2303099/2022
- Decision date
- 11 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge A. Beale Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr S T D Shek
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a judgment on an amendment application heard at London South on 11 October 2023 before Employment Judge A. Beale. The claimant, Mr S T D Shek, sought to amend the proceedings to add the Fire Brigades Union as a respondent and to add complaints of direct race discrimination and victimisation.
The tribunal allowed the amendment to add the Fire Brigades Union as a respondent. It refused the proposed amendment to include a complaint of direct race discrimination and the proposed amendment to include a complaint of victimisation, both said to arise from the respondents' denial of legal assistance with the claimant's claims against the respondents.
The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested. No monetary remedy was recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The tribunal refused the application to amend to include a complaint of direct race discrimination in respect of the respondents' denial of legal assistance with the claimant's claims against the respondents. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Victimisation | The tribunal refused the application to amend to include a victimisation complaint in respect of the respondents' denial of legal assistance with the claimant's claims against the respondents. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.