Case 6005897/2024 · Employment Tribunal

Dr Mohamad Hassan v ABC International Bank plc — 2025

Case reference: 6005897/2024
Decision date: 21 July 2025
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Hodgson
Venue: London Central

Indexed: 18 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Dr Mohamad Hassan

Respondent

ABC International Bank plc

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

This was a reserved judgment following a public preliminary hearing. The tribunal struck out complaints based on alleged failure to explain appeal procedures, alleged intentional prolongation of investigations, and the bare belief complaint because they had no reasonable prospect of success. It also dismissed the whistleblowing detriment complaints and the automatically unfair dismissal complaint as out of time, finding that it had been reasonably practicable to present them within the applicable time limit.

The tribunal found that the direct race discrimination complaint about the claimant being escorted from the respondent's premises when his employment ended and not receiving three months' gardening leave was presented out of time. Balancing the relevant factors, it found it just and equitable to extend time for that complaint, so that claim remained to proceed. The claimant's applications to amend were dismissed, and the respondent's application for a deposit order was refused.

Claims and outcomes

5 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Whistleblowing	The complaints of whistleblowing detriment contrary to s.47B(1) ERA 1996 were dismissed because they were not presented within the applicable time limit and it was reasonably practicable to do so.	Dismissed	—	—
Unfair dismissal	The complaint of automatically unfair dismissal contrary to s.103A ERA 1996 was dismissed because it was not presented within the applicable time limit and it was reasonably practicable to do so.	Dismissed	—	—
Race discrimination	The direct race discrimination complaint concerning being immediately escorted from the respondent's premises when employment was terminated and not being given three months' gardening leave was out of time, but the tribunal found it just and equitable to extend time. The claim was permitted to proceed rather than finally upheld or dismissed.	Other	Race	—
Religion or belief discrimination	The complaint described as the bare belief complaint was struck out under Tribunal Rule 38(1)(a) as having no reasonable prospect of success. Permission to amend to pursue wider philosophical belief discrimination allegations was also refused.	Struck out	Religion or belief	—
Other	The complaints relying on alleged failure to explain appeal procedures and intentional prolongation of investigations were struck out under Tribunal Rule 38(1)(a) as having no reasonable prospect of success, whether framed as discrimination, whistleblowing detriment, or otherwise.	Struck out

Legal tests applied

6 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.