Case 1308826/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss A Ndow v University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust Heard: By Cloud Video Platform – Midlands West — 2024
- Case reference
- 1308826/2023
- Decision date
- 17 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Faulkner
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss A Ndow
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a public preliminary hearing on 17 December 2024, Employment Judge Faulkner sat alone by Cloud Video Platform. The Claimant did not attend, and the Respondent was represented by Mr R Hignett of counsel. The tribunal decided that it was in the interests of justice and in accordance with the overriding objective to proceed in the Claimant's absence.
The tribunal struck out all of the Claimant's complaints on the basis that they were scandalous, vexatious and/or had no reasonable prospect of success. The judgment does not set out any substantive merits findings on the underlying complaints and records no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment does not itemise the individual complaints; this claim type is inferred from the case listing. | Struck out | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The judgment does not itemise the individual complaints; this claim type is inferred from the case listing. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment does not itemise the individual complaints; this claim type is inferred from the case listing. | Struck out | Disability | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.