Case 3201144/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Z. Shaheen v Joyalukkas Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 3201144/2024
- Decision date
- 8 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Massarella
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
- Panel members
- Mrs G. Forrest
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Z. Shaheen
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case at the East London Hearing Centre on 18-20 February 2025 and 23-24 April 2025, with oral judgment given on 8 May 2025. The written judgment records that Mrs Z. Shaheen's claims of direct race discrimination and harassment related to race were not well-founded and were dismissed, and that her claims of direct age discrimination and harassment related to age were not well-founded and were dismissed.
No monetary award is recorded in the written decision. The record also states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons will not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the sending of the written record.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination; found not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | Harassment related to race; found not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Age discrimination | Direct age discrimination; found not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Harassment | Harassment related to age; found not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.