Mr S Tipu v John Lewis plc (England and Wales : Race Discrimination) [2024] UKET 2304719/2021 (8 October 2024)

The tribunal found that the claimant had not established facts from which it could conclude that race discrimination had occurred. The respondent provided a non-discriminatory explanation for its actions, which the tribunal accepted.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: [2024] UKET 2304719/2021
Parties: Claimant: Mr S Tipu; Respondent: John Lewis plc
Jurisdiction: United Kingdom
Judgment Date: 08 October 2024
Procedural Posture: Employment Tribunal / Judgment
Outcome: Claim dismissed
Legal Topics: Race Discrimination

Employment Law Equality Law Race Discrimination

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2

Parties

Mr S Tipu

Claimant

John Lewis plc

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Tribunal / Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether the respondent discriminated against the claimant on the grounds of race in contravention of the Equality Act 2010

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.