Case 3312294/2022 · Employment Tribunal

In person For the v Mrs A Mosley-Ford (In-house Solicitor) — 2023

Case reference: 3312294/2022
Decision date: 15 December 2023
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Hanning.

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

In person For the

Respondent

Mrs A Mosley-Ford (In-house Solicitor)

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The claimant, a bus driver, presented a homemade claim in October 2022 alleging race discrimination, arrears of pay and other payments, harassment, victimisation and assault. After a preliminary hearing and the claimant's later letter, the tribunal identified surviving claims of direct race discrimination about pay rate at Arriva Milton Keynes, an unlawful deduction of wages claim about furlough and sick pay, harassment by racial abuse in 2020 and 2021, harassment from an altercation with another driver on or about 25 November 2019, and a later allegation that he was called 'monkey' in March 2023. The tribunal refused leave to amend to add several new matters raised in the later letter, including a 'black cunt' allegation, depot-move allegations, race-motivated furlough, race-based pay-dispute complaints and allegations against payroll officer James Waumsley.

The race discrimination claim failed on time limits. The claimant said he was promised a higher rate after two years and compared himself with Rufus Newbury, but the tribunal found Mr Newbury moved to an operations manager role in October 2019, ending any like-for-like comparison. The claim should have been brought by late January 2020, was not presented until 7 October 2022, and the tribunal declined to extend time under the just and equitable test.

The furlough claim related only to the weeks ending 25 April 2020 and 2 May 2020 and was also brought about two and a half years late. The tribunal refused to extend time under the reasonably practicable test. The harassment claims based on alleged racial abuse in October 2020 and January 2021 and the November 2019 altercation with Stuart were found to be isolated incidents, out of time, and not saved by an extension. The March 2023 'monkey' allegation was treated as requiring leave to amend, but leave was refused because it was unparticularised, no perpetrator was identified and the balance of prejudice favoured the respondent. All claims were dismissed.

Claims and outcomes

5 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Race discrimination	Direct race discrimination claim about the claimant's rate of pay at Arriva Milton Keynes, including comparison with Rufus Newbury. The tribunal held the claim was presented more than two years late and refused to extend time.	Dismissed	Race	—
Unlawful deduction from wages	Claim that during Covid the claimant should have been furloughed rather than placed on sick pay for the weeks ending 25 April 2020 and 2 May 2020. The tribunal held it was brought about two and a half years late and refused to extend time.	Dismissed	—	—
Harassment	Harassment allegation based on racial abuse in October 2020 and January 2021, including being called 'gorilla'. The tribunal found the allegations were out of time and refused to extend time; the claimant's later attempt to add a 'black cunt' allegation was refused leave to amend.	Dismissed	Race	—
Harassment	Harassment allegation arising from an altercation with another driver, Stuart/Stewart, on or about 25 November 2019, which the claimant said was racially motivated because he was the only person of African heritage on the shuttle. The tribunal found it was nearly three years late and refused to extend time.	Dismissed	Race	—
Harassment	Later allegation that he was called 'monkey' in March 2023. The tribunal treated it as requiring leave to amend, but refused leave because it was unparticularised, no perpetrator was identified, and the balance of prejudice favoured the respondent.

Legal tests applied

10 references

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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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.