Mr Frame, Solicitor For the v Respondent — 2023

The claimant, Ms Arunaben Limbachia Sprague, worked for Norfolk County Council as a Family Support Practitioner from 10 December 2020 until her dismissal on 4 March 2021. The tribunal heard that she was born in India, came to the UK through an arranged marriage, and had historic family and safeguarding involvement known to the respondent during her probation. The tribunal found Miss Barker and Mr Newbolt to be unconvincing and evasive witnesses, while the claimant's evidence was clear and consistent.

On direct discrimination, the tribunal held that the probationary review meeting, the dismissal, and the reasons given in the outcome letter were not because of race. It found that, whatever shortcomings existed in the way Miss Barker handled matters, the same outcome would have followed for a hypothetical comparator in materially similar circumstances with the same background. The tribunal rejected the pleaded comparators and concluded that the claimant's Indian background and arranged marriage were not the reason for the treatment.

On indirect discrimination, the tribunal accepted that the respondent had a statutory duty to safeguard children and to assess the suitability of employees working with children. It held that any PCP said to involve not employing or retaining employees who had been in abusive or arranged marriages and had Children’s Services involvement was justified as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. The harassment claim failed because the comments in the probationary review and outcome letter, although unpleasant and better expressed differently, were not found to have had the purpose or effect required by s.26 EqA 2010. All claims were dismissed and no remedy was awarded.