Case 6011367/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. M. Alphonse Respondent Booker Limited v Respondent — 2025
- Case reference
- 6011367/2024
- Decision date
- 18 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T.R. Smith
- Venue
- Newcastle upon Tyne
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr. M. Alphonse Respondent Booker Limited
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing in Newcastle upon Tyne on 18 March 2025, Employment Judge T.R. Smith recorded that the claimant's complaints of direct discrimination and harassment were struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success. The written record states that the judgment was given orally at the hearing.
The record adds that written reasons would not be provided unless requested by either party within 14 days of the sending of the written record of the decision. No remedy was awarded in this judgment record.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The judgment struck out the direct discrimination complaint as having no reasonable prospect of success. The short record does not name the protected characteristic; this has been tagged as race-related from the case listing. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Harassment | The judgment struck out the harassment complaint as having no reasonable prospect of success. The short record does not name the protected characteristic; this has been tagged as race-related from the case listing. | Struck out | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.