Cases1405559/2023

Claimant v Gloucestershire Health and Care NHS Foundation Trust

13 February 2025Before Employment Judge WoodheadBristolin person

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Direct Discrimination(race)failed

After an 8-day full merits hearing, the tribunal unanimously determined that the complaints of direct race discrimination were not well-founded and dismissed them under Section 13 of the Equality Act 2010.

Direct Discrimination(sex)failed

After an 8-day full merits hearing, the tribunal unanimously determined that the complaints of direct sex discrimination were not well-founded and dismissed them under Section 13 of the Equality Act 2010.

Victimisationfailed

After an 8-day full merits hearing, the tribunal unanimously determined that the complaints of victimisation were not well-founded and dismissed them under Section 27 of the Equality Act 2010.

Facts

Mr Ojo, a self-represented claimant, brought claims of direct race discrimination, direct sex discrimination, and victimisation against his former employer, an NHS Foundation Trust in Gloucestershire. The case proceeded to a full merits hearing lasting 8 days before a full tribunal panel, with the respondent represented by counsel.

Decision

The tribunal unanimously dismissed all of Mr Ojo's claims, finding that the complaints of direct race discrimination, direct sex discrimination, and victimisation were not well-founded. The tribunal did not need to determine questions of time limitation given that all claims failed on their merits.

Practical note

An unrepresented claimant bringing multiple discrimination and victimisation claims against an NHS Trust represented by counsel was unsuccessful after an 8-day full merits hearing, with all claims unanimously dismissed as not well-founded.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

Equality Act 2010 s.13Equality Act 2010 s.27

Case details

Case number
1405559/2023
Decision date
13 February 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
8
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
healthcare
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Claimant representation

Represented
No