Claimant v City of Westminster

Tribunal found no evidence that the claimant was treated less favourably because of her race (Chinese). Comparisons with white male colleague EK showed no discrimination. EK passed probation due to good performance and focus on priority work. Claimant failed probation due to performance issues including not following governance processes, overcomplicating projects, and not focusing on team's core work priorities.

Tribunal found no evidence that the claimant was treated less favourably because of her sex. The same performance concerns that applied to her would have applied to any employee regardless of sex. Her comparator EK received different treatment because of superior performance, not because of sex.

Tribunal found no reasonable basis for concluding that the acts complained of were done with the purpose of violating the claimant's dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. If they had that effect on the claimant, it was not reasonable for them to have done so. No connection to race established.

Tribunal found no reasonable basis for concluding that the acts complained of were done with the purpose of violating the claimant's dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. If they had that effect on the claimant, it was not reasonable for them to have done so. No connection to sex established.

Tribunal found that the claimant made protected acts during appeal and grievance meetings in May, September 2023. However, tribunal found no evidence that any detriments suffered were because the claimant had done protected acts. Performance issues predated protected acts and were consistently documented.

Claim for £187.07 shortfall for period 1-6 October 2023: Tribunal found payment was calculated correctly in accordance with Purple Book. Claim for £980 pay award: Entitlement did not arise until November 2023, after termination, so no unlawful deduction. Claimant needs to claim via proper process.

Tribunal found no breach of contract regarding salary for 1-6 October 2023 as it was correctly calculated. Regarding retrospective pay award of £980 for April-August 2023, entitlement arose after employment ended in November 2023, so no breach of contract during employment. Claimant was directed to claim via appropriate process.