The claimant in the employment tribunal, who identifies as Black African, brought a number of Equality Act 2010 complaints, including about the alleged use of the word “monkey” or “monkeys” during the course of a particular meeting, in remarks addressed to, or about, him and other Black colleagues.

The tribunal identified in its decision that the respondent averred that this word had been used in a WhatsApp group message and that the respondent contended that the context was such that the use of the word was not racial. The tribunal accepted, as a general finding, that the word had been used by the manager concerned, but without making any finding about whether it was used at the meeting about which the claimant had complained. The tribunal discussed further on its decision matters relating to the WhatsApp group message. The claimant’s complaint about the use of this word, as well as other complaints, was dismissed. However, the tribunal failed to make any specific finding about whether the word complained of had been used in the meeting about which the claimant had specifically complained, and, if so, as to the context on that occasion, and as to the merits of the complaint relating to the alleged use of that word at that meeting. The tribunal’s decision was fundamentally deficient because it failed to make findings about, and sufficiently to engage with, the specific complaint that had been raised, which related to that specific meeting.

The claimant was a litigant in person, and consideration should also have been given to whether this particular complaint should be treated as being of harassment related to race, or of harassment and alternatively direct discrimination.

The matter was remitted to a differently constituted tribunal to consider this particular complaint, relating to the alleged use of this word at the meeting in question, afresh, as one of harassment related to race, alternatively direct discrimination because of race.

[Summary reproduced from the EAT judgment]