Case 3301753/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Rahman v And Sainsbury’s Supermarkets plc Telephone Private Preliminary Hearing (Case Management) — 2020
- Case reference
- 3301753/2020
- Decision date
- 27 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mr
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Rahman
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a telephone private preliminary hearing (case management) on 27 March 2020. The judgment records claims of age, race, and religion or belief discrimination under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010.
At the hearing, Mr Rahman confirmed that he was not pursuing those claims and withdrew them. The tribunal therefore dismissed the age, race, and religion or belief discrimination claims.
No remedy was awarded or recorded in the judgment. The decision is limited to the withdrawal and dismissal of those claims at the preliminary hearing stage.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | The claimant confirmed at the preliminary hearing that he was not pursuing the age discrimination claim and withdrew it. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Race discrimination | The claimant confirmed at the preliminary hearing that he was not pursuing the race discrimination claim and withdrew it. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The claimant confirmed at the preliminary hearing that he was not pursuing the religion or belief discrimination claim and withdrew it. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 13 Equality Act 2010
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.