Mr Chemseddine Aitoukassi v Crown Workspace Ltd — 2025

Employment Judge Young heard the respondent's strikeout application at Watford on 13 December 2024. The claimant had been employed by Crown Workspace Ltd as an upholster from 11 December 2019 to 20 December 2023. The judgment applied rule 37 of the Employment Tribunal Rules and cited Cox v Adecco, Anyanwu, Mechkarov and Chandhok & Anor v Tirkey, together with Madarassy v Nomura, in explaining that discrimination claims should only be struck out in the clearest case and not where core factual issues require oral evidence.

On the unfair dismissal claim, the claimant said he had been defending himself in relation to an alleged assault and had been provoked by what Mr Keyes said to him. The tribunal held that, taking the case at its highest, the unfair dismissal claim had reasonable prospects of success and that it would need more than a cursory look at the documents to decide the issue. It therefore refused to strike out that claim.

On the discrimination complaints, the claimant said the dismissal and disciplinary process were by reason of his race or religion, and he referred to a request for a prayer room made some months earlier. The tribunal held that the direct race discrimination claim and the harassment related to race complaint should be struck out because the claimant could not explain why he believed the treatment was race-based and there was no material from which the tribunal could conclude that race discrimination had occurred. By contrast, the tribunal did not strike out the direct religious discrimination complaints, saying it could not say they had no prospects of success, and it did not strike out the harassment related to religion claim because the respondent conceded that claim was clear and did not seek strikeout or a deposit order.