Case 2407597/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Shah v Department for Work and Pensions — 2023
- Case reference
- 2407597/2021
- Decision date
- 21 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Butler
- Venue
- Manchester
- Panel members
- Ms L Atkinson, Dr H Vahramian
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Shah
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case at Manchester Employment Tribunal on 10, 11, 12 and 13 July 2023 before Employment Judge M Butler, Ms L Atkinson and Dr H Vahramian. The claimant was represented by a lay representative and the respondent by counsel.
The written judgment records the outcomes only. The tribunal dismissed the claims of victimisation, indirect race discrimination, and indirect religious belief discrimination, finding each was not well founded. The judgment states that oral reasons were given at the hearing and that written reasons would only be provided if requested within the applicable time limit.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Victimisation | The judgment records that the claim of victimisation was not well founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment records that the claim of indirect race discrimination was not well founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The judgment records that the claim of indirect religious belief discrimination was not well founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.