Case 2306560/2023 · Employment Tribunal

Miss Ruvarashe Jesse v Utopia Leisure Limited — 2025

Case reference: 2306560/2023
Decision date: 29 April 2025
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge E Fowell
Panel members: Ms L Lindsay, Ms C Edwards

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Miss Ruvarashe Jesse

Respondent

Utopia Leisure Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal heard the case at Croydon by video over 14 to 17 April 2025. In its unanimous liability judgment, it upheld the claimant's claim of victimisation on grounds of race. The judgment also recorded that the claims of harassment and discrimination on grounds of race were dismissed.

The unfair dismissal claim did not proceed on the merits. The tribunal struck it out on the basis that the claimant had less than two years' service. A remedy hearing was to be listed in due course for half a day on dates to avoid.

The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in time. No monetary award is recorded in this liability decision.

Claims and outcomes

4 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Victimisation	The tribunal upheld the claim of victimisation on grounds of race in its unanimous liability judgment.	Upheld	Race	—
Harassment	The claim of harassment on grounds of race was dismissed.	Dismissed	Race	—
Race discrimination	The claim of discrimination on grounds of race was dismissed.	Dismissed	Race	—
Unfair dismissal	The claim of unfair dismissal was struck out because the claimant had less than two years' service.	Struck out	—	—

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.