In a significant development, the Employment Appeal Tribunal has allowed the appeal of Mr. J Logo against Payone GmbH, Stefan Schrader and Axel Boyens to move forward to a preliminary hearing. This decision, marked by the Judge’s recognition of,
a number of striking features of the factual history and context, as found by the tribunal, in relation to some episodes, and it may be that there are some arguable points of challenge that raise pure points of law that can be identified.
signifies an important procedural step in a legal battle that challenges the initial tribunal’s findings on a series of incidents involving alleged race-related harassment, race discrimination, and a constructive dismissal claim.
Following the September 2023 judgment by the Watford Employment Tribunal, Payone GmbH, a Worldline SA subsidiary, was likely seeking a conclusive end to Mr. J Logo’s case. The incidents in question included a blackface episode at a Christmas party early in the Appellant’s tenure, sharing of Agnes Gaswindt’s blackface photographs, an offensive joke about a black man told by an ex-colleague Florian Risch, and allegations (found by tribunal to be without merit) over a “Pure” Blond advert the Appellant claimed were linked to aryan Nazi ideology. Additionally, there was an incident where a host at a Payone organised “team building event” questioned Mr. Logo about his “African blood” upon learning and seemingly rejecting his Black British nationality.
The appeal, notable for its extensive and comprehensive challenge spanning 36 pages, targets almost all of the tribunal’s findings and conclusions. These include a detailed examination of various incidents that Mr. Logo claims involved conduct amounting to race-related harassment or direct race discrimination. Significantly, two such incidents, according to the tribunal, would have led to successful claims under the Equality Act, if not for failing on the timing of the claims. The tribunal also concluded that these incidents did not contribute to Mr. Logo’s decision to resign, impacting the outcome of the unfair dismissal claim.
The judge’s decision to allow the appeal to proceed to a preliminary hearing rests on the identification of several striking features in the factual history and context of certain episodes as found by the tribunal. This implies that there may be arguable points of challenge that raise pure points of law.
On July 26, 2023, BaFin, the German financial regulator, imposed restrictions on Payone GmbH due to high money laundering risks and serious deficiencies in its anti-money laundering systems. Payone was prohibited from conducting transactions for certain high-risk business customers and was banned from acquiring new customers in this area. These measures were taken to prevent Payone from being misused for money laundering activities. The decision followed a special audit that revealed significant compliance failures in Payone’s due diligence processes, particularly in its e-commerce sector, where it processed credit card transactions for online retailers involved in questionable activities. The prohibition took effect on August 29, 2023.
The legal disputes between the Appellant and Worldline, particularly concerning Payone GmbH, are marked by complex layers of allegations and regulatory actions. The Appellant’s 2022-2023 protected disclosures to BaFin, highlighting anti-money laundering concerns during his tenure at Payone, have significant overlap with a “special audit” initiated by BaFin. This audit, which resulted in the termination of a substantial portion of Payone’s business, revealed issues in compliance with money laundering prevention.
The timeline discussed in the Worldline Q3 Trading Statement Call on 25 October 2023 (see Worldline Q3 statement transcript), aligns interestingly with the Appellant’s disclosures to BaFin. The regulatory actions and audit processes mentioned in the call, which affected Payone’s business and compliance practices in 2022 and 2023, coincide with the period during which the Appellant made his disclosures. This temporal alignment raises questions about the potential influence or impact of the Appellant’s actions on the regulatory scrutiny and subsequent business decisions taken by Payone and Worldline. However, the direct impact of the Appellant’s disclosures on these developments remains an area of uncertainty.
In relation to the matter at the Employment Appeal Tribunal, as a litigant in person, Mr. Logo will have the opportunity to receive assistance from an Employment Law Appeal Advice Scheme (ELAAS) representative at the preliminary hearing. This support, which acts as an important and critical resource for LiP’s could help in focusing and presenting the arguments more effectively, potentially amending the grounds of appeal, not just for the specifics of Mr. Logo’s allegations, but also for its broader implications in the realm of employment law, particularly in cases of race discrimination and harassment in the workplace. The preliminary hearing offers a platform for these issues to be examined in greater depth, potentially influencing how similar cases are approached in the future.
