Mr Q Akbar v DHL Services Limited — 2024

The Tribunal found that the Claimant was a Muslim and that his belief that a person cannot be gay and Muslim was a manifestation of his religion or belief. It also found, on the balance of probabilities, that the Claimant had used the explicit words alleged by the complainant, and that the Respondent had reasonable grounds for believing he had done so after a reasonable investigation.

The complaint of direct discrimination succeeded because, at the appeal stage, the appeal manager took into account not only the alleged explicit comments but also the Claimant's statement that a person could not be gay and Muslim. The Tribunal found that this statement significantly influenced the appeal outcome, was a manifestation of religion or belief, and that taking it into account was not shown to be necessary or proportionate.

The harassment complaint succeeded because the appeal manager repeatedly asked whether saying a person could not be gay and Muslim was homophobic, despite the point not being part of the complainant's allegation and not being in dispute. The Tribunal found this was unwanted conduct related to religion or belief. The indirect discrimination complaint was dismissed because the Tribunal was not satisfied that the policy put Muslims at a particular disadvantage when applied correctly.

The unfair dismissal complaint succeeded because the appeal decision upholding dismissal was tainted by the discriminatory reason. The Tribunal stated that dismissal for the explicit comments alone would have been within the band of reasonable responses, but did not apply a Polkey reduction; it indicated that an 80% reduction for contributory fault would be just and equitable at remedy stage.