Case 6008680/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Nicholas Cottrell v Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs FINAL HEARING — 2026
- Case reference
- 6008680/2024
- Decision date
- 10 February 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Camp
- Panel members
- Mrs DP Hill OBE, Mr K Palmer
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Nicholas Cottrell
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at Birmingham, heard a final hearing over seven days in February 2026 before Employment Judge Camp with Mrs DP Hill OBE and Mr K Palmer as panel members. The claimant, Mr Nicholas Cottrell, appeared in person against the Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs, who were represented by Miss L Price of counsel.
The tribunal upheld the claimant's direct sex and race discrimination complaints concerning the use of the words 'bravely raised their concerns' in a document described as a 'conduct checklist' dated 1 December 2023. The claimant's other complaints failed and were dismissed. Reasons were given orally at the hearing on 9 February 2026; written reasons were not provided in this record and would only be supplied on a written request within 14 days.
Following the liability decision, the parties agreed remedy by consent, and the respondent was ordered to pay the claimant compensation of £2,000. The available judgment text does not break down that figure into components such as injury to feelings or interest.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | Direct sex discrimination complaint about the use of the words 'bravely raised their concerns' in a 'conduct checklist' of 1 December 2023 succeeded. Remedy of £2,000 was agreed by consent in aggregate; not split per claim. | Upheld | Sex | — |
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination complaint about the use of the words 'bravely raised their concerns' in a 'conduct checklist' of 1 December 2023 succeeded. Remedy of £2,000 was agreed by consent in aggregate; not split per claim. | Upheld | Race | — |
| Disability discrimination | Listed as a complaint by the claimant per the gov.uk listing categories; the judgment records that the claimant's other complaints fail and are dismissed. Written reasons were given orally and not provided in this record, so the specific disability allegations are not detailed in the available text. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Sex discrimination | The judgment states that the claimant's other sex discrimination complaints (beyond the specific 'bravely raised their concerns' allegation) fail and are dismissed. Specific allegations are not enumerated in the available judgment text. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment states that the claimant's other race discrimination complaints (beyond the specific 'bravely raised their concerns' allegation) fail and are dismissed. Specific allegations are not enumerated in the available judgment text. |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,000
- across all upheld claims
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.