Case 3200837/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Mark Senior v Howard Tenens Logistics Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 3200837/2024
- Decision date
- 12 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Povey Members
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
- Panel members
- Mrs M Legg, Mr L O'Callaghan
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Mark Senior
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant, Mr Mark Senior, was employed by Howard Tenens Logistics Limited as an Operations Manager at its Tilbury site from 5 January 2007 until his dismissal on 14 June 2024. He brought two consolidated claims comprising complaints of direct race discrimination, victimisation and unfair dismissal, which were resisted in their entirety by the Respondent. The hearing was held over five days in December 2025 before Employment Judge S Povey sitting with Mrs M Legg and Mr L O'Callaghan.
The Tribunal held that the direct race discrimination complaints occurring before 15 November 2023, and the victimisation complaints occurring before 13 April 2024, were brought out of time. It concluded it was not just and equitable to extend time in either instance and accordingly had no jurisdiction to consider them. The remaining in-time direct race discrimination and victimisation complaints were considered on their merits and were not made out.
The complaint of unfair dismissal was also not made out and was dismissed. The Tribunal additionally refused, for reasons set out in an appendix, an outstanding application for specific disclosure made by the Claimant, on grounds of relevance and proportionality.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination complaints occurring before 15 November 2023 were brought out of time; the Tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend time and had no jurisdiction. The remaining direct race discrimination complaints were not made out and were dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Victimisation | Victimisation complaints occurring before 13 April 2024 were brought out of time and the Tribunal had no jurisdiction. The remaining victimisation complaints were not made out and were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The complaint of unfair dismissal was not made out and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
13 references- section 13(1) Equality Act 2010
- section 23 Equality Act 2010
- section 27 Equality Act 2010
- section 136 Equality Act 2010
- Hewage v Grampian Health Board [2012] UKSC 37
- Shamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary [2003] UKHL 11
- Chalmers v Airpoint Ltd UKEATS/0031/19
- Beneviste v Kingston University UKEAT/0393/05
- Kokomane v Boots Management Services Ltd [2025] EAT 38
- Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police v Bailey [2017] EWCA Civ 425
- Ahmed v Amnesty International [2009] IRLR 884
- Efobi v Royal Mail Group Ltd [2021] ICR 1263
- Madarassy v Nomura International plc [2007] IRLR 246
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.