UK Research and Innovation

Case Summary

Mr M. Tint brought claims of unfair dismissal, direct age discrimination, direct race discrimination, and race-related harassment against UK Research and Innovation. The tribunal, hearing evidence over six days in February and March 2026, unanimously found all claims not well-founded and dismissed them.

The tribunal did not provide written reasons, having given oral reasons at the hearing. Without access to the detailed reasoning, the specific grounds for dismissal cannot be stated.

Use these claim-type pages to compare this decision with other published tribunal cases, outcome patterns, and visible award data.

• •unfair dismissal
• •direct age discrimination
• •direct race discrimination
• •harassment related to race

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Mr M. Tint Respondent: UK Research and Innovation Heard at: On: 16,17,18,19,20 February 2026 24 and 25 March 2026 (in chambers) 26 March 2026 Before: Employment Judge S. Matthews Mrs. J. Buck Mr. L. Hoey Representation Claimant: Ms. T. Mustafa and Mr. N. Anozie (law students) Respondent: Mr. A. Tinnion (counsel) JUDGMENT The unanimous judgment of the tribunal is: 1. The complaint of unfair dismissal is not well-founded. The claimant was not unfairly dismissed. 2. The complaint of direct age discrimination is not well-founded and is dismissed. 3. The complaint of direct race discrimination is not well-founded and is dismissed. 4. The complaint of harassment related to race is not well-founded and is dismissed. Approved by: Employment Judge S. Matthews 26 March 2026 JUDGMENT SENT TO THE PARTIES ON 8 May 2026............................................ ........................................................... FOR THE TRIBUNAL OFFICE Notes Reasons for the judgment having been given orally at the hearing, written reasons will not be provided unless a request was made by either party at the hearing or a written request is presented by either party within 14 days of the sending of this written record of the decision. If written reasons are provided they will be placed online. All judgments (apart from judgments under Rule 51) and any written reasons for the judgments are published…