Medequip Not Liable for Race Discrimination: Tribunal Dismisses Appeal
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has dismissed an appeal against Medequip Assistive Technology Ltd, finding no error in the original tribunal's decision to dismiss claims of direct race discrimination.
• public
Medequip Wins Race Discrimination Appeal
Medequip Assistive Technology Ltd has successfully defended itself against an appeal in the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT). The case, brought by Mr T Tamponi, involved claims of direct race discrimination. However, the EAT upheld the original employment tribunal's decision to dismiss the claims.
The initial tribunal had dismissed Mr Tamponi's complaints of race discrimination during his employment. Mr Tamponi, an Italian national, alleged discrimination relating to two main issues:
- Being asked to provide information about his application to the EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS) and being warned about his continued employment.
- Being singled out and disciplined for allegedly failing to report a breach of Covid-19 protocol.
Key Findings of the Tribunal
The tribunal found that while Medequip had requested information from EU nationals regarding their settled status, this did not amount to a "detriment." The communication was considered innocuous, providing guidance about the EUSS scheme. The tribunal also concluded that the disciplinary process Mr Tamponi underwent was unrelated to his race or immigration status.
His Honour Judge Auerbach presided over the EAT hearing on 21 October 2025. James Laddie KC represented Medequip Assistive Technology Ltd.
Time Limit Issues
A significant factor in the appeal's dismissal was the timing of Mr Tamponi's claim. The tribunal found that the race discrimination claims were brought outside the statutory time limit. Furthermore, the tribunal ruled it was not just and equitable to extend the time limit.
The EAT agreed that the original tribunal did not err in its conclusion regarding the time limits. Even if there had been issues with the merits of the first complaint, the fact that it was filed late was decisive.
The Brexit Factor
The case also touched upon the impact of Brexit on the employment status of EU nationals. Medequip had sent letters to its EU employees, including Mr Tamponi, regarding the need to apply to the EUSS to protect their right to live and work in the UK. The tribunal concluded that these letters were prompted by changes in immigration status post-Brexit, not by Mr Tamponi's nationality.
The EAT emphasised that the key issue was the change in immigration status due to Brexit, not the employee's nationality. The judge considered Onu v Akwiwu, noting that less favorable treatment on grounds of immigration status does not equate to race discrimination.
Ultimately, the Employment Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the original tribunal's decision. Medequip was not found liable for race discrimination.
Read the entire judgement here: Mr T Tamponi v Medequip Assistive Technology Ltd [2025] EAT 180
