Case 3308186/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Skosana v The Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police — 2024
- Case reference
- 3308186/2023
- Decision date
- 20 November 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Milner-Moore REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Skosana
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing in public before Employment Judge Milner-Moore at Reading by CVP on 12 November 2024. The claimant, Mr N Skosana, brought claims including direct race discrimination and race-related harassment against the Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police.
The respondent applied to strike out elements of those claims on time limits grounds. The tribunal refused that application. It held that the question of whether the claims were presented within the applicable time limit would be decided at the final hearing, so there was no substantive merits determination and no remedy was awarded at this stage.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Preliminary hearing only. The respondent's application to strike out elements of the direct race discrimination claim on time limits grounds was refused; the tribunal said timeliness would be decided at the final hearing. | Other | Race | — |
| Harassment | Preliminary hearing only. The respondent's application to strike out elements of the race-related harassment claim on time limits grounds was refused; the tribunal said timeliness would be decided at the final hearing. | Other | Race | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.