Case 1601531/2020 · Employment Tribunal

Ms S. Harris v Barchester Healthcare Ltd — 2020

Case reference: 1601531/2020
Decision date: 25 September 2020
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge T. Vincent Ryan

Indexed: 19 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Ms S. Harris

Respondent

Barchester Healthcare Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The hearing took place by telephone before Employment Judge T. Vincent Ryan. The judgment records that, by consent, the claimant's claim that she was constructively unfairly dismissed was dismissed upon its withdrawal.

The tribunal also granted the claimant's application to amend her claim to include allegations that she was subjected to two detriments on the ground that she made protected disclosures on 29 March 2020. The written judgment does not determine the merits of those amended allegations.

Reasons were given orally at the hearing. The note states that written reasons would not be provided unless requested at the hearing, which was not done, or requested in writing within 14 days of the written record being sent.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Constructive dismissal	The judgment states that the claim that the claimant was constructively unfairly dismissed was dismissed upon withdrawal.	Withdrawn	—	—
Whistleblowing	The tribunal granted the claimant's application to amend her claim to include a claim that she was subjected to two detriments on the ground that she made protected disclosures on 29 March 2020. The merits of that claim were not determined in this judgment.	Other	—	—

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.