In the Supreme Court – not allowed – ECHR

Statutory framework:

  • Affecting wider group of EU Citizens and disabled Claimants
  • Badgering of a disabled witness, unrepresented Claimant
  • Inequality of Arms

HMCTS Statistics – 2% to 3% race discrimination success rate in a decade!

There were 3599 race discrimination cases – Total number of receipts by jurisdiction, 1 April 2018 – 31st March2019. Further 3967 race discrimination cases from 01 Apr’19 to 31 Mar’20. But 1858 race discrimination cases year 2014/15, and 2002 race discrimination cases year 2015/16. Increase twofold.[MOJ, Quarterly Statistics Employment Tribunal]

Success rate for race discrimination cases (successful at hearing) was 3% in 2007-2014; 4% in year 2014/2016, 3% 2016/2019 and 2% in 2019/2020.

Similarly for sex discrimination cases 3% in 2007/2009, 2% in 2009/2014, 1% in 2014/2018, 2% in 2018/19 and 3% in 2019/20. [MOJ, Quarterly Statistics Employment Tribunal]

Is the Equality Act 2010 compatible with the Convention Rights having regard to EU Citizens protection from discrimination post Brexit Referendum? EU Citizens (Union Citizens) having been recognized as a separate group needing additional protection from discrimination in the UKs Withdrawal Agreement from the EU(2019/C 384 I/01) and no-existing rights do not guarantee safety from discrimination or hate crimes on the increase since the referendum anti-immigration campaign:

  • “RECOGNISING that it is necessary to provide reciprocal protection for Union citizens and for United Kingdom nationals, as well as their respective family members, where they have exercised free movement rights before a date set in this Agreement, and to ensure that their rights under this Agreement are enforceable and based on the principle of non- discrimination; recognising also that rights deriving from periods of social security insurance should be protected.”
  • “Art.2.1.The United Kingdom shall ensure that no diminution of rights, safeguards or equality of opportunity, as set out in that part of the 1998 Agreement entitled Rights, Safeguards and Equality of Opportunity results from its withdrawal from the Union, including in the area of protection against discrimination, as enshrined in the provisions of Union law listed in Annex 1 to this Protocol, and shall implement this paragraph through dedicated mechanisms.”
  • “Art.12 Non-discrimination. Within the scope of this Part, and without prejudice to any special provisions contained therein, any discrimination on grounds of nationality within the meaning of the first subparagraph of Article 18 TFEU shall be prohibited in the host State and the State of work in respect of the persons referred to in Article 10 of this Agreement.

The Equality Act 2010 having not been updated to reflect the extent of increased racism and xenophobia towards EU Citizens post Brexit Referendum rendered it inappropriate statue of law to deal with EU Citizens increased discrimination and victimisation post Brexit Referendum in the very specific hostile climate, hence suffered increased discrimination and victimisation without recourse to justice.

Press reports:

“Baroness Warsi says people have been given ‘a licence to be racist’ since Brexit referendum.” [Yorkshire Post,22Jan2020]

“Horrible spike in hate crime linked to Brexit vote, Met Police says”:

“Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner expressed alarm about the figures, “We saw this horrible spike after Brexit”, he said. He revealed there was a connection between the referendum and many of the incidents and pointed out that many of the victims were Eastern Europeans.” [The Guardian, 28Sep2016]

“Britain’s 850000 Polish Citizens face backlash after Brexit vote”:

Britain’s vote to leave the European Union last week led to a near-immediate spike in reports of racist incidents. But while there is no shortage of British

racism towards familiar scapegoats such as Muslims and nonwhite immigrants, two of the most notable post-Brexit events focused instead on immigrants from a

predominantly white and Christian European country: Poland.

“Go home” were the words written on the Polish Social and Cultural Association’s building in West London. Meanwhile in Cambridgeshire, laminated cards were

distributed with the message “Leave the EU/No more Polish vermin,” written in not only English but also Polish. These two instances of anti-Polish sentiment have

prompted a high-level official response from British authorities, with Prime Minister David Cameron suggesting that such behavior “must be stamped out” during a

speech at Parliament on Monday. The Polish embassy in London also responded, releasing a statement that said it was “shocked and deeply concerned” by the


Anti-Polish sentiment is far from new to Britain. According to figures obtained by the Guardian, in 2013, British police officers arrested at least 585 people for hate

crimes against Polish people – a figure that may be a large understatement, as the newspaper was only able to get numbers from 26 of the country’s 46 police forces.

A survey from 2014 found that 81 percent of Polish people living in Britain had been subjected to verbal or physical abuse or knew another Polish person who had.[The Washington Post, Adam Taylor, June 28, 2016]

The Uk in a Changing Europe, Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), which is part of UK Research and Innovation, and based at King’s College London, found:

“EU nationals feeling unwelcome in the UK”, 28 Nov 2019

‘Go home’ rhetoric

The Conservative manifesto says that the EU Settlement Scheme was introduced for EU citizens who came to live in the UK before the referendum to ensure ‘they feel a welcomed and valued part of our country and community after Brexit’.

Our research shows that this is not what many EU citizens in fact feel. Rather, the images of the Home Office ‘Go Home’ vans from 2013, introduced as part of the hostile environment espoused by Theresa May (then Home Secretary), is more representative of what EU nationals experience.

The majority of EU nationals we have spoken to, as part of our UK in a Changing Europe project, have been subject to ‘’go home’’ rhetoric in one way or another since the referendum.

Others note that discriminatory comments are not just the hallmark of post-referendum life: they say that this rhetoric was always there but now people feel more empowered to voice those such sentiments in public.

This increasing hostility to migrants is supported by police data, which show that the number of recorded hate crimes has more than doubled in the past five years, spiking around the time of the referendum.

Alongside our focus groups, we have been running an online survey (which is still open).

To date we have had more than 100 responses from EU nationals from over 25 EU countries, the majority of whom have been living and working in the UK for more than five years.

The word that features most commonly in our survey responses is ‘unwelcome’.

‘’I am feeling less welcome in a country I consider home’’ (Spanish female, living in the UK for 15 years)

One interviewee, from King’s Lynn, told us that she is now increasingly asked “where are you from?”. She said it immediately made her feel different and like she didn’t belong. She said the subtext is: “You’re not from here.” She has lived in the UK for 15 years and is now a British passport holder, relinquishing her Lithuanian passport to settle here permanently.

Others speak of the stress this question causes them on a daily basis, even when the question is asked with conversational intent.

An Italian who has lived in the UK for nine years told us “I get asked where I’m from constantly, which is pretty anxiety inducing, as I’m never sure whether my answer will be considered an ‘acceptable‘ country or not; needless to say, most people mean it as a genuine ‘getting to know you’ question, but I’m not too keen to play Schrödinger’s Racist on a daily basis’’.

‘’I experienced racist remarks whilst speaking in my native language on the phone. A receptionist at the surgery in which I’m a patient replied: ‘That’s not how we do it in this country’ when I asked if I could book an allergy test’’ (Italian female, 10 years in the UK).


A related theme which emerged from our survey and focus groups is that EU nationals feel more visible: ‘’I am more self-conscious about how others perceive me, as a non-British person living and working in the UK’’ (Hungarian female, 10 years+ in UK).

Others do not feel comfortable speaking their own language on the streets and in communities. Some report that they now feel “stared at” if they do, and there are increasing levels of self-censorship amongst EU nationals living in the UK.

‘’After reading so many news stories on hate crime, I think twice before speaking Romanian in public in certain areas’’ (Romanian female, nine years in UK).

Others speak of having family or friends visit from their country of origin –  for example over the summer – who do not speak English (and do not plan to stay in the UK), and who receive remarks on the street about speaking their own language to one another.

The survey evidence also shows how EU nationals engage in self-censorship when in public and out in communities: “I do not take calls from my relatives when I’m in a public enclosed space (public transport, trains, waiting rooms) because I don’t want to be identified as an immigrant and I don’t know how people will react to hearing me speak a different language” (Italian female, five years living in UK).

Others give examples of times when they have received abuse on the street because of their accent, even when speaking English: “Yes. I am more careful when speak outside, don’t want people hear my foreign accent. Recently a man shouted at me ‘Bloody foreigner’ hearing my conversation in a shop” (online survey).”

By Professor Catherine Barnard, senior fellow at The UK in a Changing Europe, Fiona Costello and Sarah Fraser Butlin, University of [Source:


Most recently, the Joint Council for the welfare of immigrants, wrote to the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities in Nov 2020, stating:

“Recommendations that must be implemented to address racial inequality in the UK: A non-exhaustive list

The publications listed below that correspond to each of the four areas of interest to this commission represent merely an indication of the breadth of available literature examining the evidence on the issue at hand that is available already. We encourage members of the commission to revisit all the other evidence that has been collected and made available to them on this topic and to consider the prompt implementation of all the relevant recommendations. We further recommend that the commission examine other reports that have been made available to government over the past decade, including all the outputs of The Race Disparity Audit2016, the 2018 Shaw Review, as well as Wendy Williams’2020Windrush Lessons Learned Review, and the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants’ briefing on it.

Conclusion The reports linked above represent only a small sampling of the meticulously researched data on racial inequalities in the UK that the government has available to it. Combined they represent uncounted hours of dedicated and skilled data collection and analysis presented in clear recommendations to the government intended to make the task of addressing these inequalities as straightforward as possible. We fear that this new consultation not only duplicates the tireless work that has already been done in this area but seeks to undermine it. Black, brown and other minority ethnic British people have waited long enough for their voices to be heard, their work to be recognised and their grievances to be addressed once and for all. It is time for a demonstration of true commitment to racial equality, demonstrated through tangible action.

BREXIT related cases at Employment Tribunal

To my knowledge predominantly race discrimination cases related to Brexit failed or at least many of them, including mine. There is a pattern and a similar tone and narrative to the Judgment of those cases (see research enclosed) and it is confirming racial behavior towards EU Citizens, bound to be protected in the UK’s Withdrawal Agreement.

Badgering of the disabled witness (When a lawyer is unnecessarily hostile to, combatative with or harassing a witness) under the legal test ‘excuse’ to prove, ‘make everyone see their disability’, when they understandably DO NOT CONCEDE Claimant’s disability THEY HAVE CAUSED: in weeks or even months leading to the full hearing the Respondent took upon themselves ‘an attack’ on me regarding disability, despite providing medical records since a year prior of around 85 pieces of records from medical professionals and a disability statement, all requested by Tribunal evidence and statements! This didn’t  stop at the hearing which was a Respondent tactic to emotionally ambush unrepresented and lone Claimant RIGHT AT THE START causing attrition of Claimant chances to put her case, stay on a ‘good’ or neutral side of tribunal and sustain dignity. Tribunal went along with the Respondent pursuing Claimant. Equal Treatment Bench Book states:

The courts’ duty to litigants in person

Litigants in person may be stressed and worried: they are operating in an alien environment in what is for them effectively a foreign language. They are trying to grasp concepts of law and procedure, about which they may have no knowledge. They may well be experiencing feelings of fear, ignorance, frustration, anger, bewilderment and disadvantage, especially if appearing against a represented party.

The outcome of the case may have a profound effect and long-term consequences upon their life. They may have agonised over whether the case was worth the risk to their health and finances, and therefore feel passionately about their situation.

Subject to the law relating to vexatious litigants, everybody of full age and capacity is entitled to be heard in person by any court or tribunal.

All too often, litigants in person are regarded as the problem. On the contrary, they are not in themselves ‘a problem’; the problem lies with a system which has not developed with a focus on unrepresented litigants.

Claimant performed under huge stress and threat (car vandalised twice in a year since the start of the case), receipt of a threatening e-mail ‘Disgrace’ from sister associated company female Director! Work references blocked.


“…there is no access to justice for litigants in person, let alone people with disabilities; the “rights” that people supposedly have do not exist in reality (because there is no effective means of enforcement). We’re supposedly a first-world country and an enlightened society!” Kate B. ,2020

“We could definitely improve our employment justice system, thereby helping people who need it the most.” Katherine H., 2020

  • Inequality in Britain report: Doreen Lawrence says government’s race review gives ‘racists the green light’, Sky News Report 01 Apr 2021:

“The mother of murdered teenager Stephen Lawrence says the authors of a government-ordered race review (report from the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities) are “not in touch with reality” and “it has pushed [the fight against] racism back 20 years or more”.

But Baroness Doreen Lawrence, who was made a peer in 2013 after campaigning for justice for her son who died aged 18 in 1993 following a racially motivated attack in southeast London, says the review has given “racists the green light”.

Baroness Lawrence continued: “They [the report authors] are not in touch with reality basically. That’s what it boils down to. When you are privileged you do not have those experiences.”

The ET Hearing itself

The approach is to confuse you, to overwhelm you, to BREAK YOU.

Dare you say its racism or disability discrimination, badgering of a witness, unrepresented and vulnerable, alone and scared (threatened with car vandalism twice in a year, derogatory e-mail) in a court in the foreign country.

Hearing 3-5 Sep 2018, Respondent’s put forward 8 witnesses as opposed to 4 declared. Claimant unrepresented and alone.

%d bloggers like this: