Mr K Chikri v Support Service Leaders and Investcorp International Ltd: 2200019/2023
JUDGMENT
On hearing for the Claimant in person and Counsel for the First Respondent and Counsel for the Second Respondent:[1]The Claimant’s claim against the First Respondent that his dismissal was age discrimination is not well founded and is dismissed.[2]The Claimant’s claim against the Second Respondent, that it encouraged the First Respondent to dismiss him as an act of age discrimination, is not well founded and is dismissed.[3]Consequently, all the Claimant’s claims fail and are dismissed. Case Number: 2200019/2023REASONS
[1]The issues to be decided were discussed at the commencement of the hearing after any preliminary issues had been discussed.[2]After discussion with both counsellors and the Claimant, it was decided that the only issues needing to be determined were issues 2.1 through to 2.6 in the case management order of Judge Green at page A48 and A49 in the bundle.[3]The issues were: “Direct age discrimination (Equality Act 2010 section 13)2.1 The Claimant’s age at the time of dismissal was 56.2.2 It is accepted that the Claimant was dismissed by the First Respondent on 29 July 2022.2.3 Did the Second Respondent encourage the First Respondent to dismiss the Claimant.2.4 Was the Claimant’s dismissal or, if proven, the Second Respondent’s encouragement of the First Respondent to dismiss the Claimant less favourable treatment? The Tribunal will decide whether the Claimant was treated worse than someone else was treated. There must be no material difference between their circumstances and the Claimant’s. If there was nobody in the same circumstances as the Claimant, the Tribunal will decide whether s/he was treated worse than someone else would have been treated. The Claimant says s/he was treated worse than Miguel (Team Leader and Butler) and Jamil (a Butler).2.5 If so, was it because of age? Case Number: 2200019/2023