Claimant v Lewis & Tucker Chartered Surveyors

Tribunal found no evidence that alleged less favourable treatment (false accusations, swearing, salary differences, replacement, work pressure, holiday issues, working from home restrictions) was because of the claimant's Bangladeshi race. Most allegations were factually unproven; where proven, there was no evidence the treatment would have differed for a non-Bangladeshi person. Claimant failed to establish facts from which discrimination could be inferred.

Tribunal found no evidence that alleged less favourable treatment (same acts as race claim) was because of the claimant's Muslim religion. Respondent allowed claimant to attend daily prayer and there was no evidence requests for religious accommodation were refused. Claimant failed to establish facts from which discrimination could be inferred.

Tribunal found no evidence of sex discrimination regarding salary increases for female comparators or working from home arrangements. One comparator's salary increase was justified by additional role; others were unproven. Claimant also relied on male comparator for working from home, undermining sex discrimination argument. Claimant failed to prove less favourable treatment because of sex.

Tribunal found no evidence that alleged less favourable treatment regarding salary increases or working from home arrangements was because of the claimant's age (40s). Claimant produced no evidence to support age-related less favourable treatment. Factual basis of allegations was largely unproven.

Tribunal found that while one swearing incident in July 2022 by Mark Guy ('fuck off and leave his desk') was proven and was unwanted conduct causing humiliation, there was no evidence this was related to the claimant's race. Other alleged incidents of harassment were either unproven or not race-related. Claimant failed to establish the conduct was related to race.

Tribunal found no evidence that any proven unwanted conduct (swearing incident, work pressure, holiday contact) was related to the claimant's Muslim religion. While conduct may have been unwanted, the religious nexus was not established.

Tribunal found none of the alleged complaints constituted protected acts. Claimant admitted he did not raise discrimination complaints until after leaving employment. Where complaints were made (e.g., about swearing), they were not framed as discrimination under the Equality Act. Without protected acts, no causal link to alleged detriments could be established. Even if protected acts existed, the alleged detriments were not proven.

Tribunal found no repudiatory breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. All actions/omissions of the respondent were reasonable and proper. Claimant did not resign in response to any breach but because he secured a higher salary elsewhere. His resignation letter made no mention of discrimination. He also affirmed the contract by continuing to work after alleged discriminatory acts and by seeking consultancy work with respondent after resigning.

Same reasoning as race-based constructive dismissal claim. Tribunal found no fundamental breach, no resignation in response to breach, and evidence of affirmation. True reason for resignation was securing higher paid employment elsewhere.

Claimant accepted he was owed £157.48 which was paid in May 2023. Claimant indicated there may be further claims but failed to provide evidence or detail of any additional holiday pay owed.

Tribunal found claimant had no contractual right to overtime payment despite occasionally working late. Claimant failed to prove a salary increase to £50,000 had been agreed. Text messages relied upon were vague and could refer to anything. No documentary evidence of salary increase agreement. Therefore no unlawful deduction occurred.

Tribunal found claimant was not contractually entitled to salary of £50,000. Starting salary was £40,000 with review (not guaranteed increase) after probation. No evidence any increase was discussed or agreed. Claimant failed to prove contractual entitlement to higher salary or overtime payments.