MR MAHIR AHMED v IKEA Ltd — 2026

Case reference: 6003055/2026
Decision date: 25 June 2026
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge N. Clarke Appearances
Venue: Birmingham

Indexed: 17 July 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

MR MAHIR AHMED

Respondent

IKEA Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

Mr Ahmed did not appear at the telephone hearing before Employment Judge N. Clarke on 24 June 2026. IKEA Limited was represented by Mr Timm, counsel.

The Tribunal dismissed the claim under Rule 47. The judgment did not record separate findings on the unfair dismissal, race discrimination, or religion or belief discrimination categories, and it made no monetary award. Reasons were given orally at the hearing; the written judgment contains no further factual or legal reasoning.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The judgment dismisses the claim under Rule 47 without separately identifying or determining the listed claim categories.	Dismissed	—	—
Race discrimination	The judgment dismisses the claim under Rule 47 without separately identifying or determining the listed claim categories.	Dismissed	Race	—
Religion or belief discrimination	The judgment dismisses the claim under Rule 47 without separately identifying or determining the listed claim categories.	Dismissed	Religion or belief	—

Legal tests applied

1 reference

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.

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.