Case 1302207/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs C Smith v Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust — 2023
- Case reference
- 1302207/2023
- Decision date
- 13 November 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Childe REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs C Smith
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing in public before Employment Judge Childe on 13 November 2023. The claimant was Mrs C Smith and the respondent was Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust. The tribunal considered only limitation: whether the claims had been presented in time, and if not, whether it had been reasonably practicable to present them within the applicable time limit.
The tribunal found that the claims of direct race discrimination and victimisation on the grounds of race were not presented within the applicable time limit. It further found that it was reasonably practicable to do so within time.
Both claims were therefore dismissed. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The tribunal found the direct race discrimination claim was not presented within the applicable time limit and that it was reasonably practicable to do so. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Victimisation | The tribunal found the victimisation claim on grounds of race was not presented within the applicable time limit and that it was reasonably practicable to do so. | Dismissed | Race | — |
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.