Case 1308702/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Ahmed (Mackenzie Friend) For the v Mr J Heard (Counsel) — 2025
- Case reference
- 1308702/2023
- Decision date
- 1 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Perry
- Venue
- Birmingham
- Panel members
- Mrs W Ellis, Mr J Kelly
Parties
2 namedMr K Ahmed (Mackenzie Friend) For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Perry, sitting with members Mrs W Ellis and Mr J Kelly, gave a preliminary hearing judgment dismissing the claimant's complaints of direct race, religious belief and sex discrimination, harassment related to sex and sexual harassment, and equal pay against George Eliot Hospital NHS Trust. The respondent's material factor defence succeeded.
On the equal pay (like work) limb, the tribunal accepted the respondent's evidence that comparator pay differences (notably with Ms Stanley) reflected recruitment difficulties and individual negotiating positions in a context of ongoing recruitment shortages, and that race played no part in pay decisions. The claimant's witness evidence was found to lack the necessary detail to establish that the named comparators were in materially the same circumstances. The complaint relating to Ms Stanley was also held to be out of time.
Given the failure of the like work complaint and success of the material factor defence, the tribunal directed that a separate hearing be listed to consider striking out (or ordering a deposit on) the outstanding equal value complaint. The PDF was truncated at 15,000 of 285,684 characters; many parts of the reasoning (legal framework, discrimination findings, full list of issues) were not in the extracted portion.
Claims and outcomes
5 claims adjudicated| Claim type | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
| Sex discrimination | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Harassment | Dismissed | — | — |
| Equal pay | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 referencesSource document
Primary recordThe full judgment is available on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.