Case 2406143/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr H Khalaf v Cabinet Office and 1 other — 2019
- Case reference
- 2406143/2019
- Decision date
- 13 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge McDonald REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr H Khalaf
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant had received a conditional offer and then an unconditional offer for a Customer Service Consultant role at HMRC, with a start date of 25 February 2019. Shortly before that start date, HMRC told him he could not take up the role because of his nationality. The claimant was a Syrian national at the relevant time, although he said his British citizenship was to be confirmed shortly afterwards.
The Tribunal accepted the respondent's submissions that the Civil Service Nationality Rules and related statutory provisions prevented the claimant from being lawfully employed in the Civil Service at the relevant date. It found that Schedule 22 paragraph 5(1)(b) of the Equality Act 2010 provided a comprehensive defence to the race discrimination claim in these circumstances.
The Tribunal also accepted that the proposed employment contract was void for illegality, so it could not be enforced through either a breach of contract claim or a wrongful dismissal claim. Although the Tribunal recorded sympathy for the claimant's position, it held that all three claims had no reasonable prospect of success and struck them out.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The Tribunal found the race discrimination claim had no reasonable prospect of success and struck it out, relying on Schedule 22 paragraph 5(1)(b) of the Equality Act 2010 in relation to Civil Service nationality restrictions. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The Tribunal found the wrongful dismissal claim had no reasonable prospect of success and struck it out because the proposed employment contract was void for illegality. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The Tribunal found the breach of contract claim had no reasonable prospect of success and struck it out because the proposed employment contract was void for illegality. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals Rules 2013
- Schedule 22 paragraph 5(1)(b) Equality Act 2010
- Act of Settlement 1700 s.3
- Aliens Restriction (Amendment) Act 1919 s.6
- Aliens Restriction (Amendment) Act 1919 s.13
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.