Case 3303903/2018 · Employment Tribunal

In person For the v Mr Chadwick, Consultant — 2019

Case reference: 3303903/2018
Decision date: 21 August 2019
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Cassel
Venue: Bury St Edmunds
Panel members: Mrs M Prettyman, Mr B Smith

Indexed: 22 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

In person For the

Respondent

Mr Chadwick, Consultant

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal heard the case at Bury St Edmunds on 20, 21 and 22 February 2019 before Employment Judge Cassel. The written judgment records that the claimant was unfairly dismissed and that his race discrimination claim failed and was dismissed.

The record does not include written reasons for those outcomes, stating instead that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days. No legal test or factual reasoning is set out in the extracted text.

The remedy hearing was adjourned part heard to 21 August 2019, so the judgment records no monetary award or final remedy figure.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The tribunal found the dismissal unfair. The remedy hearing was adjourned part heard to 21 August 2019.	Upheld	—	—
Race discrimination	The claim of race discrimination was dismissed. The written record does not set out the tribunal's reasons, noting that reasons were given orally at the hearing.	Dismissed	Race	—

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.