Claimant v Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the complaint of being subjected to detriment for making protected disclosures was not well-founded after an 8-day full merits hearing. The tribunal considered allegations at paragraphs 25 a-i, with some found to be out of time and others in time but ultimately unsuccessful on their merits.
The tribunal found that the complaint of direct race discrimination was not well-founded after full consideration. Some of the alleged acts of discrimination (25 a-f) were out of time and did not form part of a continuing act, while others (25 g-i) were in time but did not succeed on their merits.
The tribunal found that the complaint of victimisation was not well-founded. The tribunal heard evidence over 8 days and concluded that the claimant had not established that she was subjected to victimisation as alleged.
The tribunal found that the complaint of automatically unfair dismissal was not well-founded. This would have been linked to the whistleblowing allegations, but the tribunal rejected the claim after hearing the evidence and submissions.
Facts
Ms Abu, an employee of Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, brought claims of whistleblowing detriment, race discrimination, victimisation and automatic unfair dismissal against the Trust and two individual managers. The claim involved multiple allegations of detrimental treatment listed at paragraphs 25 a-i of an agreed issues list. The case was heard over 8 days with full representation on both sides. A second respondent was dismissed at some point during proceedings.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed all of Ms Abu's claims. The tribunal found that allegations 25 a-f were out of time and did not form part of a continuing act, though allegations 25 g-i were in time. However, all claims failed on their merits. The tribunal found the whistleblowing, race discrimination, victimisation and automatic unfair dismissal complaints were not well-founded.
Practical note
In whistleblowing and discrimination cases, claimants must carefully manage time limits, and demonstrating a continuing act requires more than a series of unconnected allegations spread over time.
Legal authorities cited
Case details
- Case number
- 2303797/2023
- Decision date
- 11 June 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 8
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- healthcare
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister