Claimant v Secretary of State for the Home Office
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal unanimously found that the claimant failed to establish indirect age discrimination. The tribunal heard evidence over four days and concluded that the respondent's provision, criterion or practice did not place the claimant at a particular disadvantage because of his age, or that if there was such a provision, it was objectively justified by the respondent.
Facts
Mr Owen brought a claim of indirect age discrimination against the Home Office. The case was heard over four days by video conference before a full tribunal panel. Mr Owen represented himself while the Home Office was represented by counsel. The judgment contains only the final decision with no detailed findings of fact or reasoning included in the extracted text.
Decision
The tribunal unanimously dismissed Mr Owen's claim of indirect age discrimination. The tribunal found that he failed to establish that the Home Office had applied a provision, criterion or practice that placed him at a particular disadvantage because of his age, or alternatively that any such provision was objectively justified.
Practical note
Self-represented claimants face significant challenges in establishing indirect discrimination claims against well-resourced public sector respondents represented by counsel, particularly in proving group disadvantage and lack of objective justification.
Case details
- Case number
- 2218536/2024
- Decision date
- 18 July 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 4
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- central government
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No