Case 3301767/2023 · Employment Tribunal
MR M ISLAM v BMW (UK) Manufacturing Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 3301767/2023
- Decision date
- 6 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anstis
- Panel members
- Ms K Omer, Mr John Williams
Parties
2 namedClaimant
MR M ISLAM
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, an Assembly Associate, resigned without notice and brought claims of constructive unfair dismissal, direct race discrimination and harassment related to race. The tribunal considered allegations including work allocation and rotation, comments by managers, a derogatory comment by an agency worker, grievance handling, hard-hat enforcement, overcycling concerns, and an Attendance Improvement Procedure meeting.
The tribunal found that some matters were not proved, and that others had non-discriminatory explanations or were not linked to race. It found that the agency worker had made a derogatory race-related comment, but that he was not the respondent's employee or agent and the respondent was not liable for that comment; it also rejected the claims based on the respondent's handling of the related grievance.
For constructive dismissal, the tribunal found some deficiencies in the AIP process, including short notice and failures in checking absence paperwork, but held that even cumulatively the matters were not serious enough to breach the implied term of trust and confidence. The constructive unfair dismissal claim, direct race discrimination claims and harassment related to race claims were all dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment described this as constructive unfair dismissal and also referred to discriminatory constructive dismissal; the tribunal found no breach of the implied term of trust and confidence and dismissed the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The direct race discrimination claims were dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | The harassment claims were pleaded as harassment related to race and were dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
18 references- s.13 Equality Act 2010
- s.23 Equality Act 2010
- s.136 Equality Act 2010
- Shamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary
- Nagarajan v London Regional Transport
- s.26 Equality Act 2010
- Reed v Stedman
- Thomas Sanderson Blinds Ltd v English
- Weeks v Newham College of Further Education
- HM Land Registry v Grant
- s.109 Equality Act 2010
- Ministry of Defence v Kemeh
- Unite the Union v Nailard
- s.95(1)(c) Employment Rights Act 1996
- Western Excavating (ECC) Ltd v Sharp
- Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA
- Waltham Forest v Omilaju
- Kaur v Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust
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.