Case 3311788/2020 · Employment Tribunal
In Person For the v Respondent — 2022
- Case reference
- 3311788/2020
- Decision date
- 24 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anderson Members
- Venue
- Watford
- Panel members
- Mr C Surrey, Ms J Costley
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In Person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Watford by CVP before Employment Judge Anderson sitting with lay members Mr C Surrey and Ms J Costley. The claimant, Vimbai Vhondo, appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Ms M Murphy of counsel. The written record states that the tribunal dismissed the claimant's claims of direct discrimination, harassment and victimisation on the grounds of race and sex, and also dismissed the unfair dismissal claim.
The tribunal further dismissed the claimant's claims for notice pay and loss of overtime pay. The written record does not set out the tribunal's factual reasoning or any remedy calculation, and it notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing. No award is recorded in the written judgment.
Claims and outcomes
9 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Disposed of in the tribunal's paragraph 1 dismissal of the race and sex direct discrimination allegations. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | Disposed of in the tribunal's paragraph 1 dismissal of the race and sex harassment allegations. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Victimisation | Disposed of in the tribunal's paragraph 1 dismissal of the race and sex victimisation allegations. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Sex discrimination | Disposed of in the tribunal's paragraph 1 dismissal of the race and sex direct discrimination allegations. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Harassment | Disposed of in the tribunal's paragraph 1 dismissal of the race and sex harassment allegations. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Victimisation | Disposed of in the tribunal's paragraph 1 dismissal of the race and sex victimisation allegations. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed in paragraph 2. | 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.