Avicenna Retail Ltd
Case Summary
The claimant, Dr A O Agyeman, was unfairly dismissed by Avicenna Retail Ltd. The direct race discrimination complaints were not well-founded.
Key Issues
- •direct race discrimination
- •unfair dismissal
Claim Types
Cited Laws and Legal Issues
t well-founded and are dismissed. 2. The complaint of unfair dismissal is well-founded. The claimant was unfairly dismissed.
s unfairly dismissed by Avicenna Retail Ltd. The direct race discrimination complaints were not well-founded.
in jeopardy • intentional discriminatory behaviour, sexual harassment, harassment 7 of 55 in relation to any other
had but they did not until Mrs Caravona sent them the whistleblowing policy. 100.6 In discussion on the dates of the phot
dley Taylor Pharmacies Ltd (DTP) but transferred under TUPE to Avicenna Retail Ltd on 2 March 2021 [CWS1]. Respon
Decision Text
1 of 55 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Dr A O Agyeman Respondent: Avicenna Retail Limited Heard at: by CVP and in person from the Bristol Employment Tribunal On: 28, 29 and 30 April and 1 May 2025 and in chambers on 9 and 20 May 2025 Before: Employment Judge Woodhead Mrs D England Mr C Williams Appearances For the Claimant: Representing himself For the Respondent: Ms R Thomas (Counsel) JUDGMENT WITH REASONS 1. The complaints of direct race discrimination are not well-founded and are dismissed. 2. The complaint of unfair dismissal is well-founded. The claimant was unfairly dismissed. 3. The claimant caused or contributed to the dismissal by blameworthy conduct and it is just and equitable to reduce the compensatory award payable to the claimant by 25%. 4. It is just and equitable to reduce the basic award payable to the claimant by 25% because of the claimant’s conduct before the dismissal. REASONS 5. I apologise to the parties for the delay in issuing this judgment and reasons. THE ISSUES 6. There had been a preliminary hearing for case management on 23 July 2024 (“the CMPH”) before EJ Cadney at which this hearing was listed and at which the List 2 of 55 of Issues (“LOI”) to be determined by the Tribunal was discussed and agreed by the parties (see the appendix to this Judgment with the LOI amended to add clarity to the paragraph cross references). The Claimant brings complaints of unfair dismissal and direct race discrimination. The Parties confirmed that it was not alleged that the Claimant’s dismissal amounted to an act of direct race discrimination. THE HEARING Documents 7. We were provided with the following documents at the start of the hearing: 7.1 A bundle of 253 pages 7.2 A further page for the bundle (being emails of 12 and 20 September 2023) which we added as pages 254-255). 7.3 Witness statements for: 7.3.1 the Claimant of 21 numbered p...
Employer
Case Details
- Case Number
- 6002767/2023
- Decision Date
- 14/07/2025
- Published
- 22/07/2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Woodhead