Sean Bryson
A Previous Contact With The Commission For Racial Equality ( HA ! HA ! HA ! )
See also ... Learndirect - Internet Exchange - Sixty Plus - Kensington College
Microtech Computer Services - The Final Curtain for White Britain ?
Is this the writing on the wall for British Whites?
FREE Advertising Online
Free Advertising Online

Microtech Computer Services

Case number: 2300162/2001




Applicant Mr S Bryson
Respondent Microtech Computer Services Ltd


HELD AT: London South ON: 13 March 2001

CHAIRMAN: Mr R D Salter MEMBERS: Mr K Alam, Mr G Newton

The applicant: in person
For respondent: Mr J Marsh-Consultant


The unanimous decision of the Tribunal is that it has no jurisdiction to hear the claim of race discrimination.


This is an application by Mr Shaun (Sean) Bryson in which he complains that he was subject to discrimination on the grounds of race contrary to s13 Race Relations Act 1976 ('the Act'). The Respondent is Microtech Computer Services Ltd. The substance of the complaint is that on 27 July 2000 he was dismissed from a Training Programme. He presented his application to the Employment Tribunal by letter that reached the Tribunal on 6 December 2000.

Section 13 of the Act makes it unlawful for any person providing facilities for training to discriminate against an individual by terminating his training. "Discrimination" is defined by section 1. A complaint by any person that another person has committed an act of discrimination may be presented to an Employment Tribunal (s54) An Employment Tribunal shall not consider a complaint unless it is presented to the Tribunal before the end of the period of three months beginning when the act complained of was done (s68). However a Tribunal may consider any such complaint if, in all circumstances of the case, it considers that it just and equitable to do so (s68(6))

The issue for the Tribunal is whether it is just and equitable to extend time to give the Tribunal jurisdiction to hear the claim.

The Tribunal has unanimously concluded that it is not just and equitable to extend time in this case for the following reasons

The Applicant at no time was given incorrect advice in relation to his claim but he made no reasonable enquiry to obtain the advice that he needed in relation to the mechanics of making a claim.

In early August 2000 he knew that the proper forum for his complaint was the Employment Tribunal.

The Applicant knew or ought to have known that the Job Centre could not make a claim on his behalf.

The Applicant made no attempt to find out where and how to make a claim to the Employment Tribunal. The Applicant asked for assistance from the Commission for Racial Equality under s66 of the Race Relations Act 1976. But as the Commission has two months within which to consider an application for assistance there was always a risk that the time limit for making his Application would have passed.

The complaint has no reasonable prospect of success. The Applicant states that he was dismissed from the training course for not watching a video concerned with equal opportunities and racism awareness. The Respondent disputes that such was the reason for the dismissal.
* (A complaint had been received by the Respondent about the conduct of the Applicant)
But even if it were the reason, it does not amount to less favourable treatment on racial grounds.

The Application was made out of time and the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear it.

CHAIRMAN 11/04/01
Decision entered in Register and copies sent to parties on 12th April 2001

* So far I have still not been told what the complaint was or who made it. If anyone can find out and tell me in writing, I will post the details here.
In my view it is the very FIRST thing that MICROTECH should have done.

Free Speech & Anti Political Correctness Site Map