Claimant v Kent Community Health NHS Foundation Trust

The tribunal found no facts from which it could conclude the treatment was because of the claimant's race. The respondent provided clear explanations for each allegation which were in no sense whatsoever related to race. Multiple allegations were considered individually and collectively but did not establish discrimination.

The tribunal found the burden of proof did not shift under s.136 EqA 2010. The respondent provided evidence that performance concerns were genuine and that similar PIPs had been put in place for three white employees. Even if the burden had shifted, the explanations were unrelated to race.

While the tribunal found unwanted conduct satisfying the purpose or effect test under s.26 EqA 2010 at paragraph 193, it found at paragraph 194 that there was no evidence from which it could conclude or infer that the conduct was related to the claimant's race.

The tribunal found the disclosure did not meet the public interest test under s.43B ERA 1996, as it concerned only the claimant rather than a wider problem and related to a single meeting with a single manager. Additionally, the respondent showed alleged detriments were done for reasons other than the protected disclosure.

The tribunal found no evidence that the NMC referral or other alleged acts of victimisation were influenced by protected acts. The respondent provided credible evidence that the NMC referral was made due to patient safety concerns, not because of any protected acts by the claimant.