Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL 58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS At the Tribunal On 1 October 1998 Before
(1) XEROX (UK) LTD (2) MRS R HARVEY (3) MR G BLUNDEN APPELLANT MR D BUCHANAN RESPONDENT
MRS JUSTICE SMITH: This is an appeal from the decision of an Industrial Tribunal sitting at London (North) on 21 October 1997. The unanimous decision of the Tribunal was that it had jurisdiction to hear the Applicant's complaint of racial discrimination. The Applicant was Mr Buchanan, the Respondent to this appeal.
The background to the matter was that Mr Buchanan was employed by Rank Xerox from 1995 until 28 June 1996. Until 12 April 1996, his manager was Mr Blunden, the Third Respondent to the proceedings. He was then moved to work in another team, but he became ill and worked for only a few days in May 1996. On one of those days, he made a complaint to Mrs Harvey, the Second Respondent, about Mr Blunden's racist conduct towards him. Mrs Harvey promised to investigate his complaint. As we have said, he left his employment on 28 June 1996. By the time he left, he had not heard from Mrs Harvey.
On 19 September 1996, he had still not heard from her. He filed an IT1 complaining of racial discrimination. His complaint, as clarified by Further and Better Particulars provided in May 1997, was of, first, the racist conduct of Mr Blunden and, second, the failure of Mrs Harvey to investigate his complaint.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.