Case 1400391/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms K Jefford v Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust — 2020
- Case reference
- 1400391/2019
- Decision date
- 23 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Reed Members
- Venue
- Exeter
- Panel members
- Mr J Howard, Mrs P J Skillin
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms K Jefford
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Exeter on 24 and 25 February 2020 before Employment Judge Reed sitting with lay members Mr J Howard and Mrs P J Skillin. The tribunal's unanimous judgment rejected the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint because it found that she was not dismissed.
The written record also states that the harassment claim was dismissed on withdrawal. The tribunal therefore recorded no substantive finding on that claim beyond noting that it had been withdrawn.
On the disability discrimination claims, the tribunal found that the claimant was not discriminated against as a consequence of something arising from disability and that the respondent did not fail to make reasonable adjustments to avoid the disadvantage said to arise from disability. The written judgment records no monetary award or other remedy.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found that the claimant was not dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Harassment | The written record says the harassment claim was dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal rejected the allegation that the claimant was discriminated against as a consequence of something arising from disability. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal rejected the allegation that the respondent failed to make reasonable adjustments to avoid the disadvantage said to arise from disability. | Dismissed | 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.