Case 3307263/2022 · Employment Tribunal
In Person For the v Mr A Williams (Solicitor Advocate) — 2024
- Case reference
- 3307263/2022
- Decision date
- 16 November 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Matthews Members
- Venue
- Watford
- Panel members
- Mrs G Bhatt, Mr S Woodward
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In Person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal at Watford heard the case on 3, 4, 5 and 6 September 2024 before Employment Judge S Matthews with lay members Mrs G Bhatt and Mr S Woodward. Ms G Petrova appeared in person and Kru Live Limited was represented by Mr A. Williams. The judgment records claims of direct race discrimination, victimisation, and breach of contract.
The tribunal found that direct race discrimination was well founded in relation to the respondent's failure to allocate supervisor shifts to the claimant from 15 January 2022 onwards. The remaining race discrimination complaints were dismissed. It also found that victimisation was well founded in relation to removing the claimant from the role of supervisor, while the remaining victimisation complaints were dismissed.
By consent, the respondent was ordered to pay £371.51 as an additional sum for breach of contract, calculated using gross pay. The tribunal also awarded £2,880 for past financial losses, £1,058 interest on past financial losses, £5,000 for injury to feelings, and £305 interest on the injury to feelings award. The total payable by the respondent, inclusive of the agreed breach of contract sum, was £9,614.51.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination was upheld in relation to the failure to allocate supervisor shifts to the claimant from 15 January 2022 onwards. The remaining race discrimination complaints were dismissed. The judgment does not apportion the discrimination-related monetary award between the successful claims. | Upheld | Race | — |
| Victimisation | Victimisation was upheld in relation to removing the claimant from the role of supervisor. The remaining victimisation complaints were dismissed. The judgment does not apportion the discrimination-related monetary award between the successful claims. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | By consent, the respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £371.51 as an additional sum for breach of contract. The figure was calculated using gross pay. | Upheld | — | £372 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,615
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £2,880
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.