Case 3201367/2020 · Employment Tribunal

Mr R Nyamaah v JH Hart & Company Solicitors — 2020

Case reference: 3201367/2020
Decision date: 13 October 2020
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Burgher Representation
Venue: East London Hearing Centre

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr R Nyamaah

Respondent

JH Hart & Company Solicitors

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

Mr R Nyamaah was employed by JH Hart & Company Solicitors as a paralegal from 12 December 2019 and was dismissed on 28 February 2020. He contacted ACAS on 2 April 2020, received an ACAS certificate on 22 April 2020, and presented a claim for race discrimination on 20 May 2020. The respondent’s case before Employment Judge Burgher was that the pleaded complaints referred to racial undertones, but were lacking in particulars and had not been actively pursued.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Race discrimination	Struck out with the other claims for non-compliance with Tribunal orders and because the claim was not being actively pursued. The tribunal added that, if it had been necessary to consider this complaint separately, it would not have struck it out because race discrimination allegations are fact-sensitive and should usually be determined on the merits.	Struck out	Race	—
Harassment	Struck out with the other claims for non-compliance with Tribunal orders and because the claim was not being actively pursued. The tribunal said that, had it been necessary to consider this complaint separately, it would not have struck out the race harassment complaint because it was a fact-sensitive enquiry.	Struck out	Race	—
Victimisation	Struck out with the other claims for non-compliance with Tribunal orders and because the claim was not being actively pursued. The tribunal said it would have struck out the victimisation complaint separately because there was no identifiable protected act to support it.	Struck out	—	—

Legal tests applied

7 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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.