Mrs Okyere-Whalley, a black African, was employed in the Hull restaurant of Nando's during her university degree. When she graduated she was due to start another course which would mean that she needed to transfer locations to its York restaurant.

As a fully qualified and good member of staff the transfer should have ran smoothly but this was unfortunately not the case. In actual fact the York restaurant was having a recruitment drive. Given her experience, Mrs Okyere-Whalley was objectively, an ideal employee.

In August 2010, she spoke to Mr Worsfold, the manager at the York restaurant. At the later tribunal hearing, there was a conflict of evidence as to what was said during that telephone call. The tribunal preferred the evidence given by Mrs Okyere- Whalley. Mr Worsfold appeared to be happy with her experience during the telephone call and offered her a trial shift. She would be employed depending on how well this trial went. Mrs Okyere- Whalley was not offered the job.

Upon issuing proceedings, the disclosure process revealed that 17 non-black “Nandocas”, that is trained Nando's staff, were recruited in the six-month period after Mrs Okyere-Whalley’s unsuccessful application.

Mr Worsfold contested that it was the fact that Mrs Okyere-Whalley had denied the need for time off during her studies, when he knew she had in the past needed it. Mrs Okyere-Whalley, however, claimed that this question had never even been brought up during the interview. It was therefore, not indeed the case that he had questioned her integrity that had caused him not to offer her the job.

Furthermore, Mrs Okyere-Whalley was denied the opportunity to take a look around the restaurant. Instead she was told that her Hull restaurant would be contacted and then her the following day with the news. When he called the next day he explained that there was no role for her at the York restaurant. Her subsequent investigations proved that he had not actually spoken to her Hull managers and that he had lied. It was discrepancies such as these and it was said, Mr Worsfold's general demeanour, that caused the tribunal to prefer the evidence given by Mrs Okyere-Whalley.

The importance of this case lies in the fact that even despite conclusive evidence either way the tribunal made inferences from the evidence that was available. It is for this reason that employers are warned to have reasonable, and objective reasons for their behaviour.