Case 2302433/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Roha Dahir v Wimbledon Mosque (acting by its Trustees, Mohammed Sajid Haq, Dr Talat Malik, Saleem Ullah Shaikh and Mohammad Arshad) — 2021
- Case reference
- 2302433/2021
- Decision date
- 16 May 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge McCann Members
- Venue
- London South
- Panel members
- Ms K Turquoise, Mr J Hutchings
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Roha Dahir
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at London South (Croydon) before Employment Judge McCann with members Ms K Turquoise and Mr J Hutchings, found unanimously that the claimant, a part-time teacher at the Wimbledon Mosque Madrasah, was unfairly dismissed and wrongfully dismissed. The respondent had conceded unfair dismissal by reason of lack of fair procedure and had conceded that the claimant was entitled to three weeks' notice pay, having been given only two days' notice on 27 May 2021.
In relation to discrimination, the tribunal found that the claimant's dismissal amounted to both direct sex discrimination and direct race discrimination. The tribunal concluded that the claimant's race and sex both played a part in her being uniquely and quickly selected for dismissal, in contrast to other female teaching staff (Ms Baqi and Ms Najeeb) doing the same role. The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to consider reasonable alternatives that might have saved the claimant's job, and that by the time furlough was offered on 27 June 2021 the claimant had already been dismissed a month earlier.
The related discrimination complaints concerning the claimant's timetabling (placement on the 5pm-6pm shift from around 16 May 2021) were not well-founded and were dismissed. Applying Polkey/Chagger, the tribunal concluded that there was a very good chance the claimant would have remained in employment absent the procedural failings and discrimination, with the precise percentage to be determined at a remedy hearing listed for 15 April 2024.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Tribunal found dismissal unfair; respondent had conceded unfairness for lack of fair procedure. Polkey/Chagger percentage to be determined at the Remedy Hearing listed for 15 April 2024. Liability judgment only; remedy figures not contained in this judgment text. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Wrongful dismissal (notice pay) conceded by respondent. Claimant given two days' notice when entitled to three weeks. Quantum to be determined at the Remedy Hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | Direct sex discrimination in respect of dismissal well-founded. | Upheld | Sex | — |
| Sex discrimination | Separate sex discrimination complaint in respect of timetabling not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination in respect of dismissal well-founded. | Upheld | Race | — |
| Race discrimination | Separate race discrimination complaint in respect of timetabling not well-founded and dismissed. |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Polkey v A.E. Dayton Services Limited
- Chagger
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.