Case 6004832/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Singh v Sunderland Specsavers Hearcare Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6004832/2024
- Decision date
- 2 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Woodhead
- Venue
- in person at the Bristol
- Panel members
- Mr C Williams, Mrs D England
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Singh
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal heard the case in person at the Bristol Employment Tribunal on 1 and 2 September 2025 before Employment Judge Woodhead, Mr C Williams and Mrs D England. The claimant represented himself and the respondent was represented by counsel, with a pupil barrister also attending.
The unanimous decision of the Tribunal was that the complaints of direct race discrimination were not well-founded and were dismissed. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and does not set out the tribunal's factual findings or legal analysis.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The written judgment states only that the complaints of direct race discrimination were not well-founded and were dismissed. Reasons were given orally and no written reasons are included in the provided text. | 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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.