Forklift driver's race and religion discrimination claims dismissed after tribunal finds evidence unreliable
An employment tribunal has dismissed claims of race and religion discrimination, harassment and victimisation brought by a former forklift truck driver against Ken Wilkins Print Limited, finding his evidence totally unreliable and preferring the employer's witnesses.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #race-discrimination
- #religion-or-belief-discrimination
- #harassment
- #victimisation
- #unreliable-witness
- #fictional-allegations
Key facts
- The claimant was employed from 16 April 2018 to 14 October 2019 as a forklift truck driver and warehouse operative.
- The claimant alleged he was called racist names, subjected to harassment, and victimised after raising a grievance.
- The tribunal found the claimant's evidence totally unreliable and preferred the respondent's witnesses.
- The claimant's grievance about racist language was not upheld after investigation; witnesses denied the language.
- The claimant was dismissed for conduct reasons including unauthorised paternity leave, borrowing money, and using his mobile phone at work.
- The tribunal concluded the dismissal was not related to race or religion.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant commenced employment as a Forklift Truck Driver and Warehouse Operative.
-
Racist name allegation
Claimant complained of being called racist names by colleague Mr R Lowe and an altercation with Mr B Slade.
-
Grievance investigation started
Mr O'Dowd wrote to claimant advising of investigation.
-
Grievance not upheld
Mr O'Dowd concluded claimant embellished grievance; claimant transferred to main factory.
-
Appeal indicated
Claimant indicated wish to appeal; allegedly offered to drop appeal if promoted.
-
Altercation with Mr Abdelaziz
Heated argument over £3,000 loan; Mr Abdelaziz confronted claimant at work.
-
Photograph incident
Claimant showed a photograph of a colleague with a damaged pallet, allegedly to cause trouble.
-
Appeal withdrawn
Claimant emailed stating he would let matter drop as gesture of goodwill.
-
Dismissal
Claimant dismissed with immediate effect for conduct reasons including unauthorised leave, borrowing money, mobile phone use.
-
Appeal against dismissal
Claimant appealed, alleging race was real reason for dismissal; appeal rejected.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was subjected to direct race discrimination, discrimination on grounds of religion or belief, harassment, and victimisation, and whether the burden of proof shifted to the respondent to show no discrimination occurred.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims of direct race discrimination, discrimination on grounds of religion or belief, harassment, and victimisation.
The key reason was that the tribunal found the claimant's evidence to be totally unreliable and preferred the evidence of the respondent's witnesses. The tribunal concluded that the claimant's dismissal was for conduct reasons (unauthorised paternity leave, borrowing money, and using his mobile phone at work) and not related to his race or religion.
No compensation was awarded as all claims were dismissed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Tribunals will assess witness credibility carefully; inconsistent or exaggerated claims can undermine an entire case.
- Employers should ensure they have clear conduct policies and follow them consistently, as this can help defend against discrimination claims.
- Claimants must provide reliable evidence to support allegations of discrimination; unsupported assertions are unlikely to succeed.
- A grievance process that is thorough and documented can help an employer show that discrimination was not a factor in any subsequent decisions.
This case shows how an employment tribunal will scrutinise the credibility of witnesses when deciding discrimination claims. The claimant, a forklift truck driver and warehouse operative with 18 months' service, alleged he was called racist names, subjected to harassment, and victimised after raising a grievance. However, the tribunal found his evidence 'totally unreliable' and preferred the accounts given by the respondent's witnesses.
The tribunal noted that the claimant's grievance about racist language was investigated but not upheld, as witnesses denied the language. The claimant was later dismissed for conduct reasons, including taking unauthorised paternity leave, borrowing money from a colleague, and using his mobile phone at work. The tribunal concluded that the dismissal was not related to race or religion.
What the employer did right
Ken Wilkins Print Limited conducted a thorough investigation into the claimant's grievance, interviewed witnesses, and provided a reasoned outcome. The employer also had clear conduct policies and applied them consistently. This helped the tribunal accept that the dismissal was for genuine conduct reasons, not discrimination.
Why this matters
This case is a reminder that discrimination claims can fail if the claimant's evidence is not credible. Tribunals will look at the overall picture, including the employer's response to complaints and the reasons for dismissal. For employees, it highlights the importance of keeping accurate records and providing consistent evidence. For employers, it shows the value of following proper procedures and documenting decisions.
Similar cases
Social worker's race discrimination claim over 'aggressive' stereotype dismissed
A black social worker with 15 years' service lost her claims of race discrimination and constructive dismissal after an altercation with a white colleague. The tribunal found no evidence of stereotyping or unfair treatment.
Labourer's race discrimination claim survives strike-out bid despite late witness statement
A construction labourer who alleges he was subjected to monkey chants and racist abuse can proceed with his claim after the tribunal refused to strike it out, despite his late compliance with orders.
Deputy Design Director loses redundancy and discrimination claims against Greenland UK
A deputy design director who brought claims of unfair dismissal, discrimination, harassment, victimisation, and unlawful deduction from wages after being made redundant has lost all her claims at the London Central Employment Tribunal.
Agency lawyer's race discrimination claims against council dismissed; costs ordered
An agency Contracts and Procurement Lawyer lost her race discrimination, harassment and victimisation claims against the London Borough of Waltham Forest. The tribunal also ordered her to pay costs for pursuing claims with no reasonable prospect of success.