Mrs E Trobe v Nomad Health Technologies Ltd and 2 others — 2025

The respondents' application to submit a defence out of time was refused. The tribunal did not accept the explanation for the delay as credible, found that the claim papers had been sent to the registered addresses, and concluded that the delay in presenting the ET3 was very lengthy and not satisfactorily explained.

In the Rule 22 judgment, the tribunal held that unfair dismissal, automatic unfair dismissal because of public interest disclosures and health and safety concerns, health and safety detriments, protected disclosure detriments, and victimisation succeeded. It found that the direct disability discrimination, direct sexual orientation discrimination, and discrimination arising from disability claims could not be determined on the papers; the remedy judgment later recorded that those remaining claims were not pursued and were dismissed upon withdrawal.

The remedy judgment awarded loss of earnings, loss of bonus, loss of statutory rights, injury to feelings, and interest. The net award before grossing up and including interest was £66,318.32, and the grossed-up total payable was £99,169.17.