Case 2409541/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr O Jesse v Secretary of State for Work & Pensions — 2024
- Case reference
- 2409541/2023
- Decision date
- 2 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cookson
- Venue
- Manchester
- Panel members
- Mr Mockford, Ms Whistler
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr O Jesse
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the claim at Manchester on 20, 21 and 22 November 2024 before Employment Judge Cookson, Mr Mockford and Ms Whistler. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by counsel.
The judgment records that the claim was one of direct race discrimination contrary to section 13 of the Equality Act 2010. The tribunal found that the claim was not well-founded and dismissed it.
The written judgment states that reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within the applicable time limit. No remedy or monetary award is recorded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The written judgment records only that the claim of direct race discrimination contrary to section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 was not well-founded and was dismissed. Oral reasons were given at the hearing, but written reasons are not included in the supplied judgment text. | Dismissed | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 13 of the Equality Act 2010
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.