Case 3201751/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Jutrenzka v Chinnocks Wharf Management Co Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 3201751/2019
- Decision date
- 18 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Elgot Members
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
- Panel members
- Ms V Nikolaidou, Ms J Isherwood
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Jutrenzka
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was employed by Chinnocks Wharf Management Co Ltd as Building Manager from 3 December 2018 to 8 March 2019 on a salary of £35,000 per annum. He relied on Polish national origin as the relevant protected characteristic. The tribunal recorded that an earlier wrongful dismissal claim for failure to pay notice pay had been withdrawn because payment was made.
The tribunal rejected the direct race discrimination allegations. It found that the alleged remarks and conduct by Mr Sharp were not proved, and that the respondent witnesses did not know with certainty that the claimant was Polish. The tribunal also placed weight on the absence of contemporaneous written complaints of race discrimination in the claimant's January and March 2019 complaints, and on the documentary record around the grievance and probation review meetings.
The tribunal found that the dismissal on 8 March 2019 was driven by concerns about the claimant's performance, capability and conduct, not by Polish national origin. It also found that the events relied on for harassment were not established as race-related unwanted conduct. The victimisation claim failed because the tribunal found that the claimant had not done any protected act under section 27 Equality Act 2010 in the complaints and correspondence relied on.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | Claim for failure to pay notice pay was withdrawn because payment had been made; the judgment notes that it was dismissed on 11 November 2019. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination claim based on Polish national origin. The tribunal found the alleged remarks and conduct were not proved and, in any event, were not shown to be because of race. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | Harassment related to race. The tribunal found the alleged conduct was not proved or not shown to be related to the claimant's race. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Victimisation | The tribunal found no protected acts under section 27 Equality Act 2010 because the complaints relied on did not amount to allegations of Equality Act contraventions. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- s.13 Equality Act 2010
- s.26 Equality Act 2010
- s.27 Equality Act 2010
- s.136 Equality Act 2010 burden of proof
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.