Case 3200598/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Begum v London Borough of Tower Hamlets — 2025
- Case reference
- 3200598/2023
- Decision date
- 24 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Illing Members
- Panel members
- Mr J Webb, Mr L Bowman
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss J Begum
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss J Begum brought complaints arising from an October 2022 Teams meeting in which Pat Chen said to her, while trying to identify an Asian employee, “because you’re Asian and you know all the Asians, can you tell me if you know this person?”. The tribunal recorded that the complaint had initially been presented as out of time, but found that the conduct extended over a period of time and that the claim was therefore issued in time.
The tribunal dismissed the direct race discrimination complaint as not well-founded. It upheld the complaint of harassment related to race. No written reasons were provided because reasons were given orally at the hearing, and the extracted judgment does not record any remedy or monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The tribunal found the direct race discrimination complaint not well-founded and dismissed it. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | The tribunal found the complaint of harassment related to race well-founded and it succeeded. | Upheld | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.