Claimant v JD Sports Fashion plc

The Tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim under Rule 38(1)(a) because it lacked jurisdiction to consider it. The Claimant did not have the necessary two years of continuous service as required by section 108(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.

The Tribunal found the claims of race related harassment were not well founded. The Claimant failed to establish that the alleged conduct was unwanted conduct related to race or that it had the purpose or effect of violating dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment.

The Tribunal found the claim of direct race discrimination was not well founded. The Claimant failed to establish that he was treated less favourably than an actual or hypothetical comparator because of his race, or that race was a material factor in any treatment he received.

The Tribunal found the breach of contract claim was not well founded. The Claimant failed to establish that the Respondent breached any contractual term, whether express or implied, or that he suffered any loss as a result of any alleged breach.