Case 4102031/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr O Akin v Greater Glasgow Health Board — 2021
- Case reference
- 4102031/2020
- Decision date
- 25 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brewer
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr O Akin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing was an open preliminary hearing to consider the respondent's application to strike out the claimant's claims as having no reasonable prospect of success, or alternatively to require a deposit on the basis that the claims had little reasonable prospect of success. The tribunal considered the claimant's pleaded case at its highest rather than making findings on disputed evidence.
The claimant's pleaded claims were direct race and religious discrimination and harassment related to race and religion. He said that he is Turkish and Muslim, that his beard formed part of his racial and religious identity, and that his Team Leader's comments about shaving off his beard and looking younger made him very uncomfortable. He also said the comments formed part of a history of disparaging and discriminatory comments about his beard.
The tribunal held that, having heard how the claimant put his case, it could not conclude that the claims had no reasonable prospect of success or little reasonable prospect of success. The respondent's applications for strike out and for a deposit order therefore failed.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The merits of the direct race discrimination claim were not determined. The respondent's applications to strike out the claim or, alternatively, for a deposit order were refused. | Other | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The merits of the direct religious discrimination claim were not determined. The respondent's applications to strike out the claim or, alternatively, for a deposit order were refused. | Other | Religion or belief | — |
| Harassment | The merits of the harassment related to race claim were not determined. The respondent's applications to strike out the claim or, alternatively, for a deposit order were refused. | Other | Race | — |
| Harassment | The merits of the harassment related to religion claim were not determined. The respondent's applications to strike out the claim or, alternatively, for a deposit order were refused. | Other | Religion or belief | — |
Legal tests applied
14 references- Rule 37 Employment Tribunal Rules 2013
- Rule 39 Employment Tribunal Rules 2013
- section 13 Equality Act 2010
- section 136 Equality Act 2010
- Shamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary
- Igen Ltd v Wong
- Madarassy v Nomura International Plc
- Hewage v Grampian Health Board
- South Wales Police Authority v Johnson
- Anyanwu v South Bank Student Union
- Mechkraov v Citibank NA
- Mbiusa v Cygnet Healthcare Ltd
- Hassan v Tesco Stores Ltd
- Zeb v Xerox (UK) Ltd
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.