Beauty consultant on zero-hours contract fails to prove race discrimination after customer incident
A Chinese beauty consultant who claimed she was dismissed because of her race after an argument with Arabic customers has had her claim struck out. The tribunal found no link between her treatment and her race.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant, a Chinese beauty consultant on a zero-hours contract, was dismissed after failing probation tests.
- The claimant alleged direct race discrimination based on an incident with Arabic customers and an alleged anti-Chinese culture.
- The tribunal found no causal link between the claimant's race and the treatment she received.
- The claimant's claims of unfair dismissal, indirect discrimination, harassment, and victimisation were withdrawn or dismissed.
- The claim was struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success.
Timeline
-
Claimant started work
Claimant began as a Beauty Consultant on a zero-hours contract at Harrods counter.
-
Failed initial probation tests
Claimant failed Gankin massage and product knowledge tests in August 2022.
-
Incident with customers
Claimant had an argument with Arabic customers at Harrods counter; she refused to serve them.
-
Harrods Letter of Concern
Harrods sent a Letter of Concern to the respondent about the claimant's conduct.
-
Claimant complained to manager
Claimant complained to Area Manager Ms Isca about the customer incident.
-
Shifts cancelled
Claimant was informed her November shifts were cancelled.
-
Meeting with Ms Isca
Meeting about the incident; claimant says Ms Isca blamed her for taking a tea break.
-
Retook probation tests
Claimant retook Gankin and product knowledge tests; failed both.
-
Dismissal
Claimant was dismissed for failing probation tests.
-
Case management hearing
Employment Judge Stewart ordered claimant to provide further particulars of race discrimination.
-
Preliminary hearing
Hearing to consider strike out/deposit applications; claimant withdrew several claims.
-
Judgment issued
Employment Judge Norris struck out the remaining direct race discrimination claim.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's direct race discrimination claim had any reasonable prospect of success, given that she alleged she was treated unfavourably because she was Chinese and had complained about Arabic customers, but provided no evidence connecting her race to the respondent's actions.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out the claimant's direct race discrimination claim after finding it had no reasonable prospect of success. The claimant, a Chinese beauty consultant on a zero-hours contract, was dismissed after failing probation tests. She alleged that her dismissal and earlier treatment were because of her race, linked to an incident with Arabic customers. However, the tribunal found no evidence to support this.
- The claimant's claims of unfair dismissal, indirect discrimination, harassment, and victimisation were either withdrawn or dismissed earlier.
- No compensation was awarded as the claim was struck out.
Lessons & takeaways
- To succeed in a direct race discrimination claim, you must show a clear link between your race and the treatment you received – a general feeling or suspicion is not enough.
- If you are on a zero-hours contract, your rights still apply, but you must still provide evidence to support any discrimination claim.
- Failing probation tests can be a legitimate reason for dismissal, even if you have raised a complaint about a customer incident.
- Tribunals will strike out claims that have no reasonable prospect of success early, to save time and costs.
This case shows the difficulty of proving race discrimination when there is no direct evidence linking the alleged treatment to the claimant's race. The claimant, a Chinese beauty consultant working on a zero-hours contract at a Harrods counter, was dismissed after failing probation tests. She argued that her dismissal and earlier treatment were because she was Chinese and had complained about Arabic customers. However, the tribunal found that the respondent's actions – including cancelling shifts and ultimately dismissing her – were based on her failure to pass the required tests and a customer complaint, not her race.
What the respondent did right
E’Quipe Japan Limited followed a clear process: they gave the claimant opportunities to retake the probation tests, and when she failed again, they dismissed her. The tribunal noted that the claimant's own statement did not show any causal link between her race and the treatment. The respondent also had a legitimate concern about the claimant's conduct with customers, which was documented by Harrods in a Letter of Concern.
Why the claim failed
The claimant's case relied on her belief that the respondent had an 'anti-Chinese culture' and that the incident with Arabic customers was the trigger for her dismissal. But the tribunal found no evidence to support this. The claimant had been given a chance to provide further details earlier in the proceedings, but her six-page statement still failed to establish a connection. As a result, the claim was struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success.
This case is a reminder that discrimination claims must be based on evidence, not just suspicion. For anyone considering a similar claim, it is essential to gather documents, emails, or witness statements that directly link the treatment to a protected characteristic. Without that, the claim is likely to be dismissed at an early stage.
Similar cases
Sanctions law prevented maternity pay: dismissal claim struck out
A housekeeping assistant's unfair dismissal claim was struck out because UK sanctions on the company's owner made it illegal to pay her. The tribunal said the claim had no reasonable prospect of success.
HGV driver dismissed for watching YouTube videos while driving: claim struck out
An HGV driver with 10 years' service was dismissed for gross misconduct after a member of the public complained he was watching videos on his phone while driving. The tribunal struck out his unfair dismissal claim as having no reasonable prospect of success.
Strike-out for deaf former employee who tried to add new claims late
A tribunal struck out a deaf former employee's disability discrimination claim after she failed to comply with directions and attempted to add new claims that went beyond her original ET1.
Self-employed surveyor's employment claim struck out: no reasonable prospect of success
A chartered surveyor who worked for Clements Agency Limited for nearly 30 years on a self-employed basis had his claim for unfair dismissal and discrimination struck out. The tribunal found he had no reasonable prospect of proving he was an employee.