In person For the First v Respondent — 2019

At an open preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Laidler, the 11 April 2018 claim, presented after ACAS early conciliation from 9 to 13 March 2018, was identified as containing direct race discrimination, harassment and victimisation complaints. The harassment and victimisation allegations in paragraphs 14 and 15 were withdrawn by the claimant and dismissed on withdrawal.

As against Public Health England, the tribunal held that the June 2016 interview/non-offer, the February 2017 interview, the alleged 'would not fit in' comment, and the related complaint and subject access request allegations had already been brought and struck out in case 3325693/2017. Reissuing them was an abuse of process under Henderson v Henderson, Johnson v Gore Wood and Parker v Northumberland Water; alternatively they were out of time under section 123 of the Equality Act 2010 and there was no just and equitable extension. The tribunal also referred to the three-stage victimisation analysis in Derbyshire v St Helens MBC and Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police v Khan, and held that the subject access request complaints did not fall within the statutory arrangements relied on and had no jurisdictional route as Equality Act claims.

Ipswich Hospital was dismissed from the proceedings. The tribunal accepted that the interview matters involved PHE personnel, rejected the claimant's agency argument, and found that the 5 May 2017 request was sent to Colchester Hospital/PHE contacts rather than Ipswich Hospital. It also held that the March 2018 complaint did not disclose a viable cause of action against Ipswich Hospital. No remedy was awarded.