Case 3312385/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Mr Alex Watson (A Director of the respondent) — 2021
- Case reference
- 3312385/2019
- Decision date
- 15 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Alliott
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the open preliminary hearing on 5 January 2021, Employment Judge Alliott considered whether the claim should be struck out under Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The claimant, who appeared in person, alleged race discrimination and victimisation against a recruitment agency in relation to an application for work, later email contact about a vacancy, and a failure to respond after he replied in abusive terms. The tribunal noted that the claimant had also advanced an allegation that there was a "No Romanians" policy and that he had been blacklisted, but the supporting attachments related to different cases and did not set out the basis of this case.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Claim struck out under Rule 37. The tribunal treated the allegation as direct race discrimination arising from the claimant's complaint that he was refused employment because of his Romanian nationality, but found no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Victimisation | Claim struck out under Rule 37. The tribunal held the claimant had no reasonable prospect of showing detriment because of a protected act, on the facts it accepted. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 37 Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- no reasonable prospect of success
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.