Case 6018362/2024 · Employment Tribunal
in person v Respondent — 2025
- Case reference
- 6018362/2024
- Decision date
- 23 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Robin Broughton
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
1 namedClaimant
in person
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Birmingham by video on 23 September 2025 before Employment Judge Robin Broughton. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Mr T Gillie, counsel.
The written judgment records that the claimant's claims of discrimination were struck out for want of jurisdiction. No findings on the merits of the discrimination allegations are recorded in the written decision, and no remedy was awarded.
The note at the end of the judgment states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the sending of the written record.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The written record states that the claimant's claims of discrimination were struck out for want of jurisdiction. It does not separate the individual discrimination claims, but the case listing identifies race discrimination as one of the claim categories. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The written record states that the claimant's claims of discrimination were struck out for want of jurisdiction. It does not separate the individual discrimination claims, but the case listing identifies religion or belief discrimination as one of the claim categories. | Struck out | Religion or belief | — |
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.