Case 2200188/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Singh v Ministry of Justice Heard via Cloud Video Platform (London Central) — 2021
- Case reference
- 2200188/2021
- Decision date
- 2 December 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Davidson
- Panel members
- Ms S Campbell, Mr D Clay
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Singh
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting remotely via Cloud Video Platform, heard the claimant’s complaints of whistleblowing detriment and race discrimination on 30 November and 1 and 2 December 2021. The judgment records that the claims failed and were dismissed. The respondent was the Ministry of Justice and the claimant was represented by a friend, Mr M Panesar; the respondent was represented by counsel, Mr M Paulin.
The written judgment does not set out any detailed findings of fact or legal analysis in the extracted text supplied here, and no separate reasons were issued within the decision record. On the face of the judgment, the tribunal reached a dismissal of both pleaded complaints.
The tribunal also refused the respondent’s application for costs. No monetary award, injury to feelings award, or other compensation is recorded in the decision extract.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | Race | — |
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published 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.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.