Claimant v Amazon UK Services Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's complaints of protected disclosure detriments under s48 ERA 1996. The tribunal found against the claimant after a full merits hearing with oral reasons provided.
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's complaint of automatically unfair constructive dismissal on whistleblowing grounds under s103A ERA 1996. The tribunal found the claimant had not established the necessary elements for constructive dismissal on protected disclosure grounds.
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's complaints of direct race discrimination under s13 Equality Act 2010, including the allegation that his constructive dismissal was an act of direct discrimination. The tribunal found the claimant had not established facts from which discrimination could be inferred.
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's complaints of victimisation under s27 Equality Act 2010, including the allegation that his constructive dismissal was an act of victimisation. The tribunal found the claimant had not established that he was subjected to detriment because of protected acts.
Facts
Mr Arshad brought claims against Amazon UK Services Limited alleging protected disclosure detriments, automatically unfair constructive dismissal on whistleblowing grounds, direct race discrimination, and victimisation. The case was heard over six days before a full panel. The claimant represented himself throughout the proceedings while the respondent was represented by counsel.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed all of the claimant's claims after a full merits hearing. Oral reasons were provided at the conclusion of the hearing. The tribunal found that the claimant had not established his claims of whistleblowing detriment, automatically unfair constructive dismissal, race discrimination, or victimisation.
Practical note
A self-represented claimant failed to establish the necessary factual and legal elements for whistleblowing, constructive dismissal, and discrimination claims against a major technology employer represented by counsel.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1808615/2023
- Decision date
- 4 July 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 6
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- technology
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No