Case 2415215/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Duffield (1) Mr Q Hussain (2) v Ibco Limited and 2 others — 2022
- Case reference
- 2415215/2020
- Decision date
- 18 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
4 namedClaimant
Mr C Duffield (1) Mr Q Hussain (2)
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal sat at Manchester by CVP on 8-9 February 2022 before Employment Judge Phil Allen sitting alone. On the claimants' application, it refused to strike out the response under rules 37(1)(b) or (e). It also refused the respondents' application to strike out the claimants' other claims under rule 37(1)(a), so this decision did not determine the merits of those remaining claims.
The tribunal did strike out two claims. Mr Duffield's direct race discrimination claim, concerning the alleged refusal by the first and third respondents to allow a change in hours, was struck out because it had no reasonable prospect of success. Mr Hussain's harassment claim related to disability against the first and second respondents, said to rely on events in 2015, was also struck out because it had no reasonable prospect of success and because the tribunal said there was no reasonable prospect of jurisdiction to determine the complaint.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Mr Duffield's direct race discrimination claim about the alleged refusal by the first and third respondents to allow a change in hours (issue 4.2.4) was struck out because it had no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Harassment | Mr Hussain's harassment claim related to disability against the first and second respondents, said to rely on events in 2015 (issue 16.1.1), was struck out because it had no reasonable prospect of success and because there was no reasonable prospect of the tribunal having jurisdiction to determine the complaint. | Struck out | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- rule 37(1)(a)
- rule 37(1)(b)
- rule 37(1)(e)
- no reasonable prospect of success
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.
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.