Case 1401661/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Vickerage v Dorset County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust — 2025
- Case reference
- 1401661/2024
- Decision date
- 15 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Murdoch
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Vickerage
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought complaints of discrimination arising from disability under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 and harassment related to disability under section 26 of the Equality Act 2010 against Dorset County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust.
Employment Judge Murdoch, sitting alone, held that the complaints were brought out of time. Time was not extended, and the claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that the complaint of discrimination arising from disability contrary to section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 was brought out of time, time was not extended, and the claim was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The judgment states that the complaint of harassment related to disability contrary to section 26 of the Equality Act 2010 was brought out of time, time was not extended, and the claim was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 15 of the Equality Act 2010
- section 26 of the Equality Act 2010
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.