Cases2307032/2023

Claimant v Royal Mail Group Limited

10 September 2025Before Employment Judge HeathLondon South

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Direct Discrimination(race)failed

The tribunal heard the case over three days and found that the claimant failed to establish facts from which discrimination could be inferred. The claim was not well-founded and was dismissed.

Direct Discrimination(religion)failed

The tribunal found the claim of direct religion or belief discrimination was not well-founded after a full merits hearing. The claimant did not satisfy the burden of proof.

Harassment(race)failed

The tribunal determined that the harassment claim related to race was not well-founded following a three-day hearing and dismissed the claim.

Harassment(religion)failed

The tribunal found the harassment claim related to religion or belief was not well-founded and dismissed it after considering all evidence over three days.

Detrimentfailed

The tribunal dismissed the claim of part-time worker detriment, finding it was not well-founded after hearing evidence and submissions over the three-day hearing.

Facts

Mr Raval, a part-time worker employed by Royal Mail Group Limited, brought claims of direct discrimination on grounds of race and religion or belief, harassment related to both protected characteristics, and part-time worker detriment. The case was heard over three days at London South Employment Tribunal. Mr Raval represented himself while Royal Mail was represented by a solicitor. The tribunal heard oral evidence and submissions from both parties.

Decision

The tribunal dismissed all of Mr Raval's claims, finding them not well-founded. The tribunal determined that the claimant had not established facts from which discrimination, harassment, or part-time worker detriment could be inferred. Judgment was given orally at the conclusion of the hearing.

Practical note

Self-represented claimants in discrimination cases must meet the burden of proof by establishing facts from which the tribunal could conclude that unlawful discrimination occurred, and mere allegations without supporting evidence will not succeed.

Case details

Case number
2307032/2023
Decision date
10 September 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
3
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
logistics
Represented
Yes
Rep type
solicitor

Claimant representation

Represented
No