Claimant v Global Banking School Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
Multiple direct race discrimination detriment during employment claims were withdrawn by the claimant, save for the allegation regarding revocation of approved annual leave in December 2022.
Remaining claim relates to respondent's alleged revocation of the claimant's approved annual leave in December 2022, which he says was necessary for mandatory military service registration in Egypt. The tribunal found this claim had arguable merit given factual disputes over what the respondent knew and whether Indian nationals would have been treated more favourably. Strike-out application was refused.
The tribunal allowed an amendment to add an indirect race discrimination claim alleging the 2nd respondent had a policy of not having a Tier 2 visa sponsor licence, which prevented the claimant's employment from transferring under TUPE. The tribunal found this was an arguable claim relying on Osborne Clark v Purohit and granted the amendment despite its late timing.
Withdrawn by claimant at this preliminary hearing.
Withdrawn by claimant at this preliminary hearing.
Withdrawn by claimant at this preliminary hearing.
Unlawful victimisation claim withdrawn by claimant at this preliminary hearing.
Notice pay claim withdrawn by claimant at this preliminary hearing.
There was a dispute as to whether this claim had been withdrawn at a previous hearing on 19 July 2024. The claimant denied withdrawing it. The tribunal directed the issue should be addressed by the original judge or returned to Employment Judge Emery by 1 October 2025 if that was not possible.
Facts
The claimant, an Egyptian national employed in the respondent's marketing function on a Tier 2 visa, was dismissed when his employment did not transfer under TUPE to the 2nd respondent (an associated company). The 2nd respondent refused to obtain a sponsor licence, meaning the claimant could not transfer. The claimant alleged this was race discrimination. He also complained his approved annual leave for December 2022 was revoked by the 1st respondent despite his need to register for military service in Egypt. The respondents applied to strike out the direct race discrimination claims on the basis immigration status is not a proxy for race.
Decision
This was a preliminary hearing dealing with competing applications. The tribunal refused the respondent's strike-out application in respect of the remaining direct race discrimination claim (revocation of leave). It allowed the claimant's late application to amend to add indirect race discrimination, finding it was a relabelling exercise of facts already pleaded and was arguable on the merits. The claimant withdrew most other claims. The status of the whistleblowing claim remained unresolved pending clarification of whether it had been withdrawn at a previous hearing.
Practical note
A blanket refusal by a transferee company to obtain a sponsor licence preventing Tier 2 visa holders from transferring under TUPE may constitute indirect race discrimination and can be pleaded even at a late stage if the underlying facts were already in the claim form.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3311584/2023
- Decision date
- 30 July 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- education
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Marketing function
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No