Case 2303198/2017 · Employment Tribunal

In Person For the v Respondent — 2019

Case reference: 2303198/2017
Decision date: 16 April 2019
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge K Bryant QC
Panel members: Ms H Pollard, Ms S Evans

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

1 named

Claimant

In Person For the

Respondent

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At the liability hearing on 15 and 16 April 2019 in Croydon, the tribunal, chaired by Employment Judge K Bryant QC with Ms H Pollard and Ms S Evans, dealt with the claimant's direct race discrimination claim and dismissal claims against Cordant Cleaning Limited. The tribunal held that the claim for direct race discrimination was well-founded in part.

It also found that the claimant was constructively dismissed and unfairly dismissed. The extracted judgment does not set out the detailed factual findings or reasons beyond those conclusions, and it is limited to liability.

No remedy figures are recorded in the extracted text. The judgment therefore establishes liability only, with the monetary outcome to be dealt with separately or elsewhere if available.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Race discrimination	The tribunal held that the claimant's claim for direct race discrimination was well-founded in part.	Upheld	Race	—
Constructive dismissal	The tribunal found that the claimant was constructively dismissed.	Upheld	—	—
Unfair dismissal	The tribunal found that the claimant was unfairly dismissed.	Upheld	—	—

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.