Case 3302374/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Gough v The Secretary of State for Justice — 2025
- Case reference
- 3302374/2022
- Decision date
- 27 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shastri-Hurst
- Venue
- Reading
- Panel members
- Ms D Ballard, Dr C Whitehouse
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Gough
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was summarily dismissed following a use of force incident with a prisoner on 20 July 2021. The tribunal accepted that conduct was the reason for dismissal, but held that the ordinary unfair dismissal claim was well-founded.
The tribunal upheld some harassment allegations. It found that an IRA-related text message, the refusal of promotion in May 2020, and the suggestion to the claimant's union representative that the claimant should consider resignation amounted to harassment related to race and religion or belief. It also upheld the allegation about childish name calling as harassment related to race only.
The tribunal dismissed all direct discrimination claims and dismissed the harassment allegations not specifically upheld, including the allegations concerning dismissal. It concluded that the discrimination and harassment complaints that succeeded were in time as conduct extending over a period, and alternatively that it was just and equitable to extend time.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that the ordinary unfair dismissal claim was well-founded and succeeded. The judgment does not quantify remedy. | Upheld | — | — |
| Race discrimination | All direct discrimination claims were dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | All direct discrimination claims were dismissed. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
| Harassment | The harassment claim was upheld in relation to race for the IRA text message, childish name calling, refusal of promotion in May 2020, and the resignation comment to the claimant's union representative. Other harassment allegations, including harassment by dismissal, were dismissed. | Upheld | Race | — |
| Harassment | The harassment claim was upheld in relation to religion or belief for the IRA text message, refusal of promotion in May 2020, and the resignation comment to the claimant's union representative. The religion or belief harassment allegation concerning childish name calling and other harassment allegations, including harassment by dismissal, were dismissed. | Upheld | Religion or belief | — |
Legal tests applied
10 references- s.98 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.98(4) Employment Rights Act 1996
- British Home Stores Ltd v Burchell
- band of reasonable responses
- Polkey v AE Dayton Services Ltd
- s.13 Equality Act 2010
- s.23 Equality Act 2010
- s.26 Equality Act 2010
- s.123 Equality Act 2010
- s.136 Equality Act 2010
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.