Case 2415513/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Aslam v Concentrix CVG Intelligent Contract Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2415513/2020
- Decision date
- 7 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Holbrook REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Aslam
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Holbrook on 24 June 2021, the tribunal ordered that all claims in the proceedings were struck out except for the claims identified in paragraph 2 of the judgment. The excepted claims were direct discrimination on the grounds of race and/or religion and harassment on the grounds of race and/or religion.
The tribunal recorded that those remaining claims arose from the claimant's allegation that, in May and June 2020, he was subjected to excessive quality checks and/or disciplinary action. It also said that, to the extent necessary, the claimant was permitted to amend his ET1 to include those claims.
The judgment was a preliminary hearing decision only and did not determine the merits of the remaining race and religion discrimination and harassment claims. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The tribunal said this was one of the remaining claims after striking out all other claims at the preliminary hearing. No merits decision was made at this hearing; the claim was permitted to proceed and ET1 amendment was allowed if necessary. | Other | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The tribunal said this was one of the remaining claims after striking out all other claims at the preliminary hearing. No merits decision was made at this hearing; the claim was permitted to proceed and ET1 amendment was allowed if necessary. | Other | Religion or belief | — |
| Harassment | The tribunal said this was one of the remaining claims after striking out all other claims at the preliminary hearing. No merits decision was made at this hearing; the claim was permitted to proceed and ET1 amendment was allowed if necessary. | Other | Race | — |
| Harassment | The tribunal said this was one of the remaining claims after striking out all other claims at the preliminary hearing. No merits decision was made at this hearing; the claim was permitted to proceed and ET1 amendment was allowed if necessary. | Other | 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.