Case 2307868/2020 · Employment Tribunal

In Person For the v Respondent — 2022

Case reference: 2307868/2020
Decision date: 15 March 2022
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Balogun Date

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

1 named

Claimant

In Person For the

Respondent

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

This was a judgment on preliminary issues only, heard by Employment Judge Balogun on 15 March 2022. The claimant, Mr James Orior, appeared in person and the respondent, British Broadcasting Corporation, was represented by Mr Kelly, Counsel.

The tribunal struck out the claims of race discrimination, age discrimination and disability discrimination under Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013 because they had no reasonable prospects of success. No liability findings or remedy award were made in this judgment.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Race discrimination	The race discrimination claim was struck out under Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013 on the ground that it had no reasonable prospects of success.	Struck out	Race	—
Age discrimination	The age discrimination claim was struck out under Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013 on the ground that it had no reasonable prospects of success.	Struck out	Age	—
Disability discrimination	The disability discrimination claim was struck out under Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013 on the ground that it had no reasonable prospects of success.	Struck out	Disability	—

Legal tests applied

2 references

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.