Case 6002917/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Rafal Gerc v Mr Presley Urubusi and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 6002917/2024
- Decision date
- 28 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gray Appearances
- Venue
- Southampton
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr Rafal Gerc
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing took place at Southampton on 27 to 29 October 2025 before Employment Judge Gray. The Claimant appeared in person and the Respondents were represented by Mr P Urubusi. The written record concerns complaints of direct disability discrimination and harassment related to disability.
The judgment states that allegations 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 2.1.3 and 2.1.4 were dismissed on withdrawal. It further states that the remaining allegations in the discrimination and harassment complaints failed and were dismissed. No monetary award is recorded in the judgment.
The written record also notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested. No further reasoning is set out in the supplied text.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment records that allegations 1.2.3 and 1.2.4 were dismissed on withdrawal, and that the remaining allegations failed and were dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The judgment records that allegations 2.1.3 and 2.1.4 were dismissed on withdrawal, and that the remaining allegations failed and were dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
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.