Case 1806799/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs K Boyle v Humber Teaching NHS Foundation Trust — 2020
- Case reference
- 1806799/2019
- Decision date
- 4 August 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Maidment Representation
- Venue
- Hull
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs K Boyle
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs K Boyle brought complaints against Humber Teaching NHS Foundation Trust, including unfair dismissal and age discrimination-related complaints. The tribunal dealt with the case on 3 August 2020 before Employment Judge Maidment sitting alone.
The tribunal held that the unfair dismissal complaint had been submitted out of time. It found that it did not consider it was not reasonably practicable for the claim to have been submitted within the limitation period. On that basis, the tribunal said it had no jurisdiction to hear the unfair dismissal claim and struck it out.
The judgment also records that the claimant’s complaints of age discrimination, harassment and victimisation were dismissed upon her withdrawal of them. No remedy was awarded and no compensation figures are recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the unfair dismissal complaint was submitted out of time and that it was not reasonably practicable for it to have been submitted within the time limit; it therefore had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Struck out | — | — |
| Age discrimination | The judgment records that the age discrimination complaint was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Age | — |
| Harassment | The judgment records that the harassment complaint was dismissed upon withdrawal; the only protected characteristic identified in the judgment was age. | Withdrawn | Age | — |
| Victimisation | The judgment records that the victimisation complaint was dismissed upon withdrawal; the only protected characteristic identified in the judgment was age. | Withdrawn | Age | — |
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.