Case 3301927/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Dejuan Jackson v Lidl Great Britain Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 3301927/2020
- Decision date
- 22 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bedeau Representation
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Dejuan Jackson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary judgment in a race discrimination case. The tribunal struck out the claimant's racial harassment complaint about alleged exclusion by his Area Manager between January 2018 and 19 November 2018 because it had been presented out of time, and it did not extend time.
The tribunal also struck out an allegation of race discrimination based on events on 1 July 2019 for the same reason. The respondent's wider applications for strike out and deposit orders were refused.
Some race discrimination allegations identified in the respondent representative's skeleton argument were allowed to proceed to a final hearing, while allegations 5, 8 and 10 were dismissed following withdrawal by the claimant. No remedy was awarded in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harassment | Racial harassment claim relating to alleged treatment by the Area Manager from January 2018 to 19 November 2018, described as racial harassment by exclusion, was struck out as out of time; the tribunal did not extend time. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Race discrimination | Allegation of race discrimination based on events on 1 July 2019 was struck out as out of time; the tribunal did not extend time. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Race discrimination | Allegations numbered 5, 8 and 10 in the respondent representative's skeleton argument were dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
| Race discrimination | Allegations numbered 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 9 were allowed to proceed to a final hearing; the judgment records no final determination of those allegations. | Other | 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.