Case 2501246/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss R Sharif v TATA Consumer Products GB Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 2501246/2024
- Decision date
- 5 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sweeney Representation
- Venue
- Newcastle
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss R Sharif
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss R Sharif’s complaint against TATA Consumer Products GB Limited was heard remotely at Newcastle on 5 February 2025 before Employment Judge Sweeney. The written judgment records a complaint described as race/religion discrimination and harassment related to race or religion.
The tribunal dismissed the complaint because it had not been brought within the three-month period starting with the act complained of, and the tribunal did not extend time on a just and equitable basis. No substantive merits findings are recorded in the written record.
The note to the judgment states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in time.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The written judgment described the complaint as race/religions discrimination / harassment related to race or religion. It was dismissed as out of time because it was not brought within 3 months of the act complained of and no just and equitable extension was allowed. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.