Cases6023602/2025

Claimant v Avantao Technologies Ltd

3 December 2025Before Employment Judge D N JonesEast Londonremote telephone

Outcome

Default judgment

Individual claims

Indirect Discrimination(race)succeeded

The Respondent published a job advert on Glassdoor on or around 24 March 2025 for a DevOps Engineer which stated 'Only candidates who are immigrants from India will be considered.' This wording explicitly excluded the Claimant on grounds of race and nationality and prevented him from applying for the role. The Respondent failed to defend the claim or provide any justification for this provision, criterion or practice.

Facts

The Claimant, who holds a First-Class Honours degree in Computer Science and is proficient in Python, noticed a job advert for a DevOps Engineer posted by the Respondent on Glassdoor on 24 March 2025. The advert stated 'Only candidates who are immigrants from India will be considered', which prevented the Claimant from applying. The Respondent later claimed on social media on 3 April 2025 that the advert was a mistaken internal training exercise, but the advert remained publicly visible on Glassdoor and was still accessible when the claim was issued. The Respondent failed to submit a valid ET3 response despite being given an opportunity to do so.

Decision

The Tribunal found the complaint of indirect race discrimination well-founded and succeeded under Rule 22 (default judgment). The discriminatory job advert explicitly excluded the Claimant on grounds of race and nationality without any justification. A remedy hearing was scheduled for 16 January 2026 to determine compensation.

Practical note

Employers who publish job adverts restricting applications to candidates of a specific national or racial origin commit unlawful indirect (or direct) race discrimination, even if they later claim the advert was published in error.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2024 Rule 22

Case details

Case number
6023602/2025
Decision date
3 December 2025
Hearing type
rule 21
Hearing days
1
Classification
default

Respondent

Sector
technology
Represented
No

Claimant representation

Represented
No