Case 3202096/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G. Innamorato v London Ambulance Service NHS Trust — 2026
- Case reference
- 3202096/2024
- Decision date
- 14 January 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Massarella Members
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
- Panel members
- Ms J. Houzer, Mr T. Brown
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G. Innamorato
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal recorded that the Claimant brought claims against London Ambulance Service NHS Trust. The claims identified in the judgment were direct race discrimination and harassment related to race.
The Tribunal held that the direct race discrimination claims were not well-founded and dismissed them. It also held that the harassment related to race claims were not well-founded and dismissed them. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, and the extracted written judgment does not set out the factual findings or legal analysis.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The judgment states that the claims of direct race discrimination were not well-founded and were dismissed. Written reasons were not provided in the extracted text. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | The judgment states that the claims of harassment related to race were not well-founded and were dismissed. Written reasons were not provided in the extracted text. | Dismissed | Race | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.