Case 3315921/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. Mohammad Usman and v Bidvest Noonan (UK) Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 3315921/2021
- Decision date
- 19 December 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge G Smart
- Panel members
- Mr. Z Khan, Mr. I Morrison
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. Mohammad Usman and
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal heard the case at Birmingham from 11 to 15 December 2023 before Employment Judge Smart, sitting with Mr Z Khan and Mr I Morrison. The Claimant appeared in person and the Respondent was represented by counsel.
The judgment records that the Claimant's claims for direct race discrimination were not well founded and were dismissed. It also records that the Claimant's claims for harassment related to race were not well founded and were dismissed. The reasons were given orally at the hearing, and no further written reasons are included in the judgment text supplied.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The judgment states that the Claimant's claims for direct race discrimination were not well founded and were dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | The judgment states that the Claimant's claims for harassment related to race were not well founded and were dismissed. | Dismissed | 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.