Mr T John v G4S Care & Justice Services (UK) Limited and 2 others — 2025

The claimant had worked for the First Respondent and then the Third Respondent in two prisons. The claims against the First Respondent had already been dismissed on withdrawal. The remaining discrimination claims concerned alleged failures by the Second and Third Respondents to investigate a written complaint dated 15 December 2022 and an alleged refusal of permission to take an early or further break on 14 December 2022. There was also an unpaid holiday pay claim against the Third Respondent.

The tribunal dismissed the holiday pay claim because the claimant had not set out a basis for it in his witness statement or schedule of loss, had not quantified it, and the evidence about absences did not enable the tribunal to consider or quantify the claim. On the race discrimination claims, the tribunal applied the burden of proof under section 136 of the Equality Act 2010 and considered employer and agency liability under section 109.

The tribunal found that the claimant's assertion that he was black was not enough to shift the burden of proof. It accepted that the Second Respondent's failure to complete an investigation was caused by personnel changes and was unrelated to race. It found the Third Respondent had not been asked to investigate, the complaint concerned a Vinci manager rather than an employee or agent of the Third Respondent, and the refusal of a further break was by the Vinci manager for whose acts the Third Respondent was not liable. The claims against the Second and Third Respondents were dismissed.