Case 3303768/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Glasgow v Gobel & Partner Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 3303768/2020
- Decision date
- 29 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anstis
- Panel members
- Mr C Davie, Mrs J Smith
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Glasgow
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr J Glasgow brought claims against Gobel & Partner Ltd that, from the GOV.UK listing and the judgment record, included race discrimination and unfair dismissal. The case was heard at Reading by CVP on 8 and 9 November 2021 before Employment Judge Anstis, sitting with Mr C Davie and Mrs J Smith, with the claimant appearing in person and the respondent represented by Mr I Lovejoy.
The written judgment record states only that the claimant’s claims were dismissed. It does not set out the tribunal’s findings in writing because the reasons were given orally at the hearing and the written record notes that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days. No monetary award is recorded in the written decision.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The written record states that the claimant’s claims were dismissed. No separate reasons for the race discrimination claim are set out in the written record because the reasons were given orally at the hearing. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The written record states that the claimant’s claims were dismissed. No separate reasons for the unfair dismissal claim are set out in the written record because the reasons were given orally at the hearing. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.