Case 2201627/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Chowdhury v Royal Free London NHS Trust and 1 other — 2022
- Case reference
- 2201627/2020
- Decision date
- 26 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Case No
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr S Chowdhury
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Deol on 13 October 2021, not a full merits determination. The Claimant's pleaded complaints were direct disability discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, failure to make reasonable adjustments, and victimisation. The tribunal held that the COT3 dated 27 October 2020 did not preclude or prevent the Claimant from bringing those claims in these proceedings.
The 2nd Respondent's application to strike out the claims on the basis that it was the wrong Respondent failed. The tribunal stated that the respondent issue would be determined at the full merits hearing. No liability findings were made on the discrimination complaints, and no remedy was awarded at this stage.
Case management orders were then made for a full merits hearing to determine liability and remedy over five days in May 2022 at London Central Employment Tribunal. The judgment therefore records only preliminary procedural rulings and does not resolve the substantive discrimination allegations.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | At the preliminary hearing, the tribunal held that the COT3 dated 27 October 2020 did not preclude or prevent the Claimant from bringing these proceedings. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | The 2nd Respondent's application to strike out the claims on the basis that it was the wrong Respondent failed; the issue was left to be determined at the full merits hearing. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.