Case 6000624/2023 · Employment Tribunal

Mr R Durrani v De Montfort University — 2024

Case reference: 6000624/2023
Decision date: 5 January 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Ahmed

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr R Durrani

Respondent

De Montfort University

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At a preliminary hearing on 14 December 2023, Employment Judge Ahmed sitting alone at Leicester by CVP considered the Claimant's complaint of direct race discrimination against De Montfort University. The tribunal found that the complaint was presented out of time, but decided it was just and equitable to extend time. As a result, the claim was permitted to proceed to a full hearing.

The tribunal also refused the Respondent's applications for strike out of the race discrimination complaint and for a deposit order in respect of that complaint. Case management orders for the full hearing were dealt with separately. The judgment records a preliminary decision only and does not determine liability on the substance of the discrimination claim.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Race discrimination	Preliminary hearing only. The tribunal found the Claimant's direct race discrimination complaint was out of time, but it was just and equitable to extend time, so the claim was allowed to proceed to a full hearing. The Respondent's applications to strike out the complaint and for a deposit order were both refused.	Other	Race	—

Legal tests applied

3 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.