Case 2601563/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. H Raidhan v Secretary of State for the Department of Work & Pensions — 2019
- Case reference
- 2601563/2019
- Decision date
- 18 July 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Heap
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. H Raidhan
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records complaints of indirect discrimination, harassment, and victimisation said to arise from association or perception on grounds of religion or belief. No substantive merits findings are set out because the case was dealt with as a strike-out decision.
By letter dated 2 July 2019, the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to explain why the complaints should not be struck out. The claimant did not make written representations, or did not make any sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. The Tribunal therefore struck out the complaints under rule 37, in a judgment dated 18 July 2019 by Employment Judge Heap.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Religion or belief discrimination | Indirect discrimination based on association or perception on grounds of religion or belief. | Struck out | Religion or belief | — |
| Harassment | Harassment based on association or perception on grounds of religion or belief. | Struck out | — | — |
| Victimisation | Victimisation based on association or perception on grounds of religion or belief. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 37
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.