The Claimant had owned and operated two companies, registered with the Respondent, providing immigration advice and services. In 2014, the Respondent refused both companies' applications for re-registration, and the Claimant was unsuccessful in appealing those decisions in the First-Tier Tribunal, Upper Tribunal and Court of Appeal. In 2017, the Respondent was concerned that the Claimant was providing immigration advice and services in circumstances that did not meet the requirements of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, and so it embarked on an investigation including obtaining a search warrant. The Claimant brought proceedings in the ET alleging race discrimination, victimisation and harassment. The ET drew a distinction between the 'qualification body' function exercised by the Respondent in 2014 and its 'enforcement' function exercised in 2017, and concluded that, under the relevant provisions of the Equality Act 2010, it had no jurisdiction to hear the Claimant's claims. The Claimant appealed on the grounds that the ET had erred in a number of its conclusions.

The EAT held that the ET had correctly concluded that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the Claimant's claims, and it had been right to strike out all of his claims.