Zakaria Kioua wins UK tribunal Case as his prize was swapped. Zakaria Kioua won Cognac but his price was switched. He then sued the employer for harassment.
- Zakaria Kioua wins the case against the manager for religious harassment.
- He won a Cognac but his gift was switched with a box of Chocolates.
- He then sued the manager and finally won the case.
UK tribunal Case Won by Muslim Man Zakaria Kioua
Zakaria Kioua a Muslim man has sued his employer. He worked at a hotel where his employer harassed him based on his religion. Zakaria won a Cognac which is a bottle of Alcohol. He won it in a Raffle which took place at a staff party. Zakaria was given chocolates instead of Cognac.
Zakaria was told by the manager of the hotel which is in Hampshire that as Zakaria did not drink Alcohol, giving him a gift of an Alcohol bottle is just like giving a person nuts who have a nut allergy.
Zakaria said that by hearing this he felt humiliated and said that religion must never be compared with an illness, both are different things.
Zakaria earlier worked as a Linen Porter at Lainston House which is in Winchester. Later he mover to the UK. In the year 2017, there was a party that had a raffle.
Zakaria did not attend the party but his ticket was drawn out as a lucky winner and he won Cognac bottle. One staff member said that he does not drink alcohol. Another staff member took the chocolate box on behalf of Zakaria as he was not present at the party.
In the year 2018, there was a meeting held and the manager said that if one person has a nut allergy and if they give that person chocolate instead of Nuts, we changed the prize that night.
Zakaria said that he felt humiliated by this and said that he was ignored and they did not want him to get the prize so they used his religion. In 2019 he filed a case against the hotel.
The judgment of the case was that a nut allergy is a life-threatening illness and it must not be compared. And it reduces the importance of someone’s beliefs.
The decision to swap Zakaria’s gift must not be taken and the statements made must not have said. The court further claimed that religious harassment and belief contrary to the Equality Act succeeded. The hotel was ordered by the court to pay £2,000 for injury to feelings along with interest.