Case 2600704/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr I Mohamed v Acis Group Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2600704/2021
- Decision date
- 14 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brewer Representation
- Venue
- Midlands East Tribunal via Cloud Video Platform
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr I Mohamed
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was an open preliminary hearing on 13 April 2022 before Employment Judge Brewer, following an earlier closed case management hearing on 28 January 2022. The tribunal considered whether the claimant's direct race discrimination claim, said to arise from his dismissal and the rejection of his appeal, should be struck out under rule 37(1)(a). The judge set out the direct discrimination and burden of proof principles under sections 13 and 136 of the Equality Act 2010, and referred to authorities including Shamoon, Igen, Madarassy, Hewage, Anyanwu, Mechkraov, Mbiusa, Hassan and Zeb.
The judge found that the claimant had not provided facts from which a tribunal could conclude that race played any part in the dismissal or appeal outcome. The claimant had previously said at the closed hearing that he was not alleging conscious or unconscious racial prejudice by the dismissing officer or the appeal panel, but at the open hearing he shifted position and asserted that those decision-makers were motivated by race. The judge found that there was no comparator, no surrounding facts or circumstances from which adverse inferences could be drawn, and no proper basis for an inference of direct race discrimination. The tribunal also noted that the claimant's explanation for his dismissal was a matter going to the band of reasonable responses.
On that basis the tribunal struck out the race discrimination claim as having no reasonable prospect of success. The judgment records that the claimant's unfair dismissal claim remained and would proceed to a final hearing.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination claim concerning dismissal and failure of appeal; struck out under rule 37(1)(a) on the basis that it had no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
12 references- rule 37(1)(a) strike out
- section 13 Equality Act 2010
- section 136 Equality Act 2010
- Shamoon comparator principle
- Igen/Madarassy burden of proof
- Hewage v Grampian Health Board
- Anyanwu caution on striking out discrimination claims
- Mechkraov v Citibank NA
- Mbiusa v Cygnet Healthcare Ltd
- Hassan v Tesco Stores Ltd
- Zeb v Xerox (UK) Ltd
- South Wales Police Authority v Johnson
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.