Case 3313782/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ilyas Yasin Hassan v Royal Mail Group Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 3313782/2023
- Decision date
- 20 February 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hutchings
- Venue
- Cambridge
- Panel members
- Mr B. Smith, Mrs W. Smith
Parties
2 namedIlyas Yasin Hassan
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, a Muslim LGV driver of black African and black British race based at Royal Mail Group Limited's Midlands Super Hub, brought five complaints arising from an incident on 6 September 2023 between himself and a colleague while he was praying, and from the respondent's subsequent handling of that incident and his grievance and bullying-and-harassment complaint. The case was heard over five hearing days in February 2026 before Employment Judge Hutchings sitting with two non-legal members.
The Tribunal found unanimously that none of the complaints — direct religion or belief discrimination, direct race discrimination, harassment related to religion or belief, harassment related to race, and victimisation — were well founded, and dismissed each of them. On victimisation specifically the Tribunal found that the conduct relied on (including the way the grievance appeal was handled and a heavy-handed approach by a manager to a separate trailer-door incident) had not been because of the protected acts the claimant relied on. The Tribunal applied Shamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary on the test for detriment.
Claims and outcomes
5 claims adjudicated| Claim type | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|
| Religion or belief discrimination | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
| Race discrimination | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
| Harassment | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Victimisation | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 referencesSource document
Primary recordThe full judgment is available 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.