Claimant v London Borough of Islington

The tribunal found no evidence that the Claimant's race (Black African) played any conscious or subconscious part in any of the alleged treatment. The tribunal examined 17 specific allegations of direct race discrimination and found none established a prima facie case. The pattern that emerged was one of operational and management pressures during the Covid-19 Pandemic, personality clashes and a power struggle between the Claimant and Mr Turnock, rather than race discrimination.

The tribunal found that while some conduct was unwanted, none of it was related to race. The tribunal examined the same 17 allegations as harassment related to race and concluded there was no relationship or connection between any of the conduct and the Claimant's race. Even where conduct may have violated dignity (such as the 'contract' email), it was not related to race.

The tribunal found the Claimant resigned to take voluntary redundancy, not in response to any breach of contract. The tribunal concluded that none of the incidents, individually or cumulatively, were calculated or likely to destroy trust and confidence. The most serious incident (the 'contract' email) was isolated, historic, and not acted upon. The tribunal was not satisfied the treatment amounted to a repudiatory breach of contract, and in any event the Claimant did not resign in response to it.

The claim under s.38 Employment Act 2002 concerning the statement of initial particulars under s.1 Employment Rights Act 1996 was dismissed. The tribunal recorded that the matter was not pursued before them.