SUMAN DAS v Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis — 2026

The tribunal dismissed all of Suman Das's complaints of direct race discrimination against the Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis. Das identified his ethnicity as Asian Bangladeshi and had worked as a Police Community Support Officer before becoming a probationary police constable. The claim concerned an adverse reference, responses to his concerns about it, performance reports and the handling of his complaints about those reports and an HR assessment. He relied on a hypothetical white British probationary constable in materially similar circumstances.

The tribunal found that the challenged decisions were discrete acts and did not form a continuing discriminatory state of affairs. The allegations concerning the reference, DCS Adjei-Addoh's November 2023 review and CS Walmsley's May 2024 review were out of time. It refused a just and equitable extension after considering the length of the delay, the absence of a satisfactory explanation, prejudice, the available evidence, Das's personal circumstances and the apparent merits. The allegations concerning AC Rolfe and the July 2024 grievance review were in time. The tribunal nevertheless considered every allegation on its merits.

Inspector Burgess provided an adverse reference on 25 May 2022. The tribunal accepted that he genuinely held the concerns expressed, but did not determine whether every criticism was correct. The reference contained no reference to race, and Das established no facts supporting an inference that it was given because of his race. An administrative error meant that the reference was not considered during recruitment, so Das suffered no detriment in the appointment process itself. The tribunal also found that race played no part in Burgess's later contact with Inspector Freeman about the reference.

DCS Adjei-Addoh considered Das's concerns on 17 November 2023, expressly declined to rely on the reference and gave him a further opportunity to complete probation. CS Walmsley and AC Rolfe subsequently treated the reference as outside the scope of their decisions and did not rely on it. Their assessments concerned Das's performance, attendance, health restrictions, progress through probation and failure to achieve Independent Patrol Status. Following the final review on 25 July 2024, Rolfe concluded that he was unlikely to become an efficient and well-conducted constable. His employment ended on 26 July 2024.

The Grievance Management Team considered and responded to Das's complaints about the reference. Applying the grievance policy, it concluded that the matters belonged within the Regulation 13 process or other procedures. Mr Baird reviewed that position in July 2024. The tribunal found that the grievances had not been ignored; the dispute concerned which procedure should address them. There was no evidence that race influenced those decisions.

The tribunal accepted that Sergeant Harris-Jones and Inspector Freeman genuinely held their concerns about Das's operational performance and progress. Their reports drew on contemporaneous records and feedback from trainers, including concerns about statement writing, arrest procedure, interviewing and the use of policing powers. Although the reports concentrated on deficiencies, their purpose was to explain the Regulation 13 recommendations. The tribunal found no deliberate omission of positive contributions to disadvantage Das and no evidence of positive operational achievements that materially changed the assessment.