Polish gay pastry chef loses discrimination claims over lack of evidence
A pastry chef who alleged years of anti-Polish and homophobic comments by colleagues failed to prove discrimination, as the tribunal found no contemporaneous evidence and noted the employer's diverse workforce.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #race-discrimination
- #sexual-orientation-discrimination
- #harassment
- #polish-employee
- #gay-employee
- #no-contemporaneous-evidence
- #out-of-time
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Pastry Chef from April 2017, with continuous service from 2010.
- The claimant alleged six incidents of discriminatory comments between 2014 and 2019.
- The claimant did not produce diary entries or any contemporaneous written evidence of the alleged comments.
- The claimant's partner gave evidence that largely repeated the claimant's assertions.
- The respondent employed many Polish pastry workers and had gay employees in the group, inconsistent with an anti-Polish or anti-gay culture.
- The claimant remained employed for years after the alleged incidents without making any formal complaint.
Timeline
-
First alleged discriminatory comment
Claimant alleged Mr Debenko called him and his partner 'fucking Polish faggots' in the kitchen.
-
Second alleged comment
Claimant alleged Mr Debenko called him a 'fucking Polish dog' in the kitchen.
-
Third alleged comment
Claimant alleged Mr Debenko called him and his partner 'Polish faggots' and 'trash' in a cafe.
-
Fourth alleged comment
Claimant alleged Mr Debenko called him and his partner 'fucking Polish faggots' in the kitchen.
-
Fifth alleged comment
Claimant alleged Mr Debenko called him a 'fucking Polish faggot' in a cafe.
-
Sixth alleged comment
Claimant alleged Ms Hodryieva called him a 'fucking Polish dog' in Dubai.
-
Claimant's purported resignation
Claimant left his hotel in Dubai abruptly and claimed he resigned by words to Ms Hodryieva.
-
Meeting with Mr Alexander Login
Claimant said he reaffirmed his resignation; Mr Login interpreted it as financial negotiations.
-
Claim presented to Tribunal
Claimant's claim form stated employment was continuing; no mention of resignation.
-
Withdrawal of money claims
Claimant withdrew unauthorised deductions, national minimum wage, and breach of contract claims.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant had been subjected to direct race discrimination, sexual orientation discrimination, and harassment under the Equality Act 2010, based on six alleged comments between 2014 and 2019.
The outcome
The tribunal unanimously dismissed the claims for direct race discrimination, sexual orientation discrimination, and harassment.
Key reasons:
- The claimant did not produce any diary entries or contemporaneous notes of the alleged comments.
- His partner's evidence largely repeated the claimant's own assertions and added little weight.
- The respondent employed many Polish pastry workers and had openly gay employees, which was inconsistent with a discriminatory culture.
- The claimant remained employed for years after the alleged incidents without making any formal complaint.
The unfair dismissal claim was also dismissed because the claimant was still employed when he presented his claim, so the tribunal had no jurisdiction.
No compensation was awarded.
Lessons & takeaways
- Keep a written record of any discriminatory comments or incidents as soon as they happen – contemporaneous notes can be crucial evidence.
- If you experience discrimination, consider raising a formal grievance promptly; delays can weaken your case.
- Tribunals will look at the employer's overall culture and workforce composition when assessing the likelihood of discrimination.
- Your claim must be presented to the tribunal within the correct time limits – and you must have actually been dismissed before claiming unfair dismissal.
- Witness evidence from partners or friends may carry less weight if it simply repeats your own account.
This case shows how difficult it can be to prove discrimination when there is no written evidence and the alleged incidents happened years ago. The claimant, a pastry chef of Polish origin and gay, said he had been subjected to a series of abusive comments from colleagues between 2014 and 2019. But he had not kept a diary or made any notes at the time, and he did not report the comments to his employer until after he left.
Why the claim failed
The tribunal noted that the respondent, UKCAKE Ltd, employed many Polish workers and had gay employees in its workforce. That did not automatically rule out discrimination, but it made the alleged pattern of abuse less plausible. The claimant's partner gave evidence, but the tribunal found it added little because it largely repeated what the claimant had already said. Crucially, the claimant remained in his job for years after the first alleged comment, which the tribunal said was inconsistent with someone who felt genuinely harassed.
What the employer did right
UKCAKE Ltd was able to point to its diverse workforce and the fact that no other employee had made similar complaints. The company also highlighted that the claimant had not raised any formal grievance while employed. For employers, this case reinforces the importance of having a clear culture of inclusion and being able to demonstrate that discrimination is not tolerated.
Key takeaway for employees
Anyone considering a discrimination claim should keep a detailed written record of every incident, including dates, times, and witnesses. Raising a grievance promptly also strengthens a case. Without contemporaneous evidence, tribunals may find it hard to accept allegations, especially if the employer can show a generally inclusive workplace.
Similar cases
Probation dismissal: race discrimination claims fail on time limits and merits
A Solution Architect who alleged race discrimination and harassment during his probation was dismissed from his job. The tribunal found nearly all claims were brought too late, and the rest failed on the facts.
Sonographer forced to clean and threatened with deportation: race discrimination upheld
A black African sonographer was racially harassed and discriminated against after being required to perform cleaning duties and threatened with deportation. The tribunal awarded £33,611.12.
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.
Black psychiatric nurse passed over for dual diagnosis lead role: race and sex discrimination upheld
A Black African community psychiatric nurse with 15 years' service was found to have been discriminated against when two white female colleagues were appointed to a specialist lead role he was qualified for. The tribunal upheld his claims of direct race and sex discrimination and harassment.