Cases2401512/2024

Claimant v Bury Metropolitan Borough Council

30 October 2025Before Employment Judge HillManchesterremote video

Outcome

Other

Individual claims

Direct Discrimination(race)not determined

This was a preliminary hearing on respondent's strike-out and deposit order applications. The tribunal found the claimant had set out 11 allegations where she alleged less favourable treatment compared to white colleagues, including being spoken to disrespectfully, not taken seriously, and failures to follow procedures during grievance. The tribunal held these required a full merits hearing to determine if the events occurred and amounted to discrimination.

Facts

The claimant alleged 11 separate instances of race discrimination by her employer, Bury Metropolitan Borough Council, including being spoken to disrespectfully, not being taken seriously, invited complaints about her, failures to follow protocols to her detriment, and failures to follow procedures during her grievance. She provided actual or hypothetical comparators for each allegation, asserting white colleagues would not have been treated the same way. The respondent applied to strike out the claim and for a deposit order.

Decision

The tribunal refused both the strike-out and deposit order applications. The judge found that the claimant had provided sufficient detail of 11 allegations that, if proven, could amount to less favourable treatment on grounds of race. Determining whether the events occurred and whether they constituted discrimination required a full merits hearing with oral evidence, and it was not appropriate to resolve these core factual disputes at a preliminary hearing.

Practical note

Discrimination claims involving multiple allegations supported by comparators will not be struck out at a preliminary hearing where core factual disputes require oral evidence to resolve, even where the claimant is self-represented.

Legal authorities cited

Mechkarov v Citibank NA [2016] ICR 1121Ahir v British Airways plc [2017] EWCA Civ 1392

Case details

Case number
2401512/2024
Decision date
30 October 2025
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
public sector
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Claimant representation

Represented
No