Case 3302284/2022 · Employment Tribunal
In Person For the v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 3302284/2022
- Decision date
- 13 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge George Members
- Venue
- Reading
- Panel members
- Ms A Crosby, Ms J Pope
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In Person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim proceeded solely as a direct race discrimination claim under s.13 and s.41 Equality Act 2010 after the claimant confirmed she was not pursuing a separate harassment case. The dispute arose from the night shift of 9/10 December 2021 at Winchcombe Place, where the claimant, who was working as a contract worker, had an altercation with the Team Leader and Ms Boyd about the air conditioning and then about what she said was discriminatory treatment.
The tribunal rejected the alleged racial remarks in list of issues 7.2.1 to 7.2.4. It found the claimant had not proved that the Team Leader said she was "always cold because of the colour of your skin", that Ms Boyd said "she doesn't belong here", or that the Team Leader said "you're not one of us, you don't belong here" or "black bitch". The tribunal found the claimant had quickly accused the Team Leader of discrimination during the argument and that his reference to her leaving did not carry the racial connotation alleged.
The tribunal accepted that Ms Boyd used intemperate language at stage 4, including "we don't need you here" and "why don't you leave here, you're useless to us, you have a bad attitude", but held that this was caused by irritation arising from the earlier confrontation rather than race. It also rejected the allegation that the later handling of the claimant's grievance was discriminatory, finding the delay was explained by the home manager's illness, Ms Jamieson's bereavement, Covid-related disruption, and the respondent's non-discriminatory handling of the complaint. The claim was dismissed and no remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination under s.13 and s.41 Equality Act 2010. The tribunal rejected the alleged racist remarks on 9/10 December 2021, found Ms Boyd's intemperate comments at stage 4 were prompted by irritation arising from the dispute and were not because of race, and held that the complaint-handling delay was explained by non-discriminatory reasons. | Dismissed | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
9 references- s.13 Equality Act 2010
- s.41 Equality Act 2010
- s.136 Equality Act 2010
- Madarassy v Nomura International plc
- Shamoon v Chief Constable of the RUC
- Igen Ltd v Wong
- Hewage v Grampian Health Board
- Efobi v Royal Mail Group Ltd
- De Souza v Automobile Association
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.