Cases2304120/2024

Claimant v South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust

23 July 2025Before Employment Judge AtkinsLondon Southremote video

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Constructive Dismissalstruck out

The claim of constructive unfair dismissal against the First Respondent was struck out because the tribunal found it had no reasonable prospect of success.

Unfair Dismissalstruck out

The claim of unfair dismissal against the Second Respondent was struck out because the tribunal found it had no reasonable prospect of success.

Direct Discrimination(race)struck out

The complaint of race discrimination against the First Respondent was struck out because the tribunal found it had no reasonable prospects of success.

Direct Discrimination(race)struck out

The complaint of race discrimination against the Second Respondent insofar as it related to fatigue was struck out because the tribunal found it had no reasonable prospects of success.

Direct Discrimination(race)struck out

The complaint of race discrimination against the Second Respondent regarding being refused permission to work at home/required to work in the office was presented out of time under s.123 Equality Act 2010 and the tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend time. The tribunal dismissed the claim as it did not have jurisdiction.

Facts

Ms Omoregie brought claims of constructive and unfair dismissal and race discrimination against two NHS Trusts. The discrimination claims related to fatigue and being refused permission to work from home/being required to work in the office. She appeared in person at a preliminary hearing.

Decision

The tribunal struck out all claims. The unfair dismissal and constructive dismissal claims against both respondents were struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success. The race discrimination claims were struck out either for having no reasonable prospect of success or, in relation to one aspect regarding home working, for being presented out of time with no just and equitable reason to extend time.

Practical note

Claimants appearing without legal representation in preliminary hearings face significant challenges in establishing reasonable prospects of success, particularly on jurisdictional time limit issues.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

EqA 2010 s.123

Case details

Case number
2304120/2024
Decision date
23 July 2025
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
1
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
healthcare
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Claimant representation

Represented
No