Case 2400088/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Patel v Wm Morrison Supermarkets Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2400088/2024
- Decision date
- 28 November 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Benson REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Patel
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr S Patel’s unfair dismissal claim against Wm Morrison Supermarkets Limited was withdrawn by the claimant and dismissed. The written record does not contain substantive reasons on the merits of that claim, and notes that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing.
The tribunal also dealt with two race-based discrimination claims. It struck out the direct race discrimination claim and the harassment claim related to race under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(a), on the basis that both had no reasonable prospect of success. No monetary remedy was awarded in the written judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The written judgment states that the unfair dismissal claim was withdrawn by the claimant and is dismissed. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The tribunal struck out the direct race discrimination claim under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(a) because it had no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Harassment | The tribunal struck out the harassment claim related to race under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(a) because it had no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(a)
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.