Case 3219814/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Akintayo v Ballymore (Millharbour) Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 3219814/2020
- Decision date
- 25 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Park Members
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
- Panel members
- Mrs J Henry, Mr L O'Callaghan
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Akintayo
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the East London Hearing Centre on 23, 24 and 25 November 2022, Employment Judge Park sitting with Mrs J Henry and Mr L O'Callaghan determined Mr A Akintayo's claims against Ballymore (Millharbour) Ltd. The judgment records claims of indirect race discrimination, direct race discrimination, race harassment and victimisation, together with whistleblowing claims under sections 103A and 47B of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The indirect race discrimination claim was dismissed on withdrawal by the Claimant. The tribunal found that the direct race discrimination claims failed and were dismissed, and the same outcome was reached for the claims of harassment on the grounds of race and victimisation.
The tribunal also dismissed the protected disclosure claims. It held that the claim of automatic unfair dismissal contrary to section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996 failed, and the claims for detriments contrary to section 47B Employment Rights Act 1996 also failed. No monetary remedy is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Indirect race discrimination claim dismissed on withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination claims all failed and were dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | Harassment on the grounds of race claims all failed and were dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Victimisation | Victimisation claims all failed and were dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Whistleblowing | Automatic unfair dismissal claim under section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996 (protected disclosure) failed and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Claims for detriments contrary to section 47B Employment Rights Act 1996 (protected disclosure) failed and were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 47B Employment Rights Act 1996
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.