Case 2603941/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs J Gordon-Temple v PeoplePlus Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2603941/2020
- Decision date
- 1 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ahmed Members
- Panel members
- Mr J. Akhtar, Mr C Goldson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs J Gordon-Temple
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting in Nottingham on 28, 29 and 30 March 2022 before Employment Judge Ahmed with members Mr J. Akhtar and Mr C Goldson, gave a unanimous judgment on 1 April 2022. The claimant, Mrs J Gordon-Temple, brought complaints of direct race discrimination, harassment based on race, unfair dismissal and breach of contract against PeoplePlus Group Ltd.
The tribunal dismissed both discrimination complaints. It dismissed the complaint of direct race discrimination and also dismissed the harassment complaint, in each case on the basis that they were based on the protected characteristic of race.
The tribunal upheld the unfair dismissal complaint, but found that the claimant contributed to her dismissal. It ordered that compensation would be reduced by 50% in respect of both the basic and compensatory awards because of that contributory conduct. The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract.
Remedy was not determined at this judgment. The issue of remedy was adjourned to 17 June 2022 at 10.00am at the Nottingham Justice Centre, with separate case management orders for the remedy hearing.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination complaint dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | Harassment complaint based on race dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Claimant was found unfairly dismissed, but compensation was to be reduced by 50% for contributory conduct. Remedy was adjourned. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract. Remedy was adjourned. | Upheld | — | — |
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.