(1) In person (2) Represented by Ms Feng v Respondent — 2021

This was a preliminary hearing in the three linked cases heard on 21 January 2021. The tribunal first determined the correct employer respondent. It accepted the Respondents' documentary evidence that both claimants were employed by National Westminster Bank PLC at the relevant time, that Ms Holland's employment transferred to National Westminster Bank PLC from 1 November 2018, and that the individual respondents were also employed by National Westminster Bank PLC. On that basis, National Westminster Bank PLC was added as the first respondent.

The tribunal discharged Coutts & Co and Royal Bank of Scotland Group as respondents. It found that those entities were not the employers of either claimant or of the individuals about whose conduct the complaints were made, and that they had no role in the proceedings. Ms Feng's objection that Coutts should remain because it was the workplace and the case was about what Coutts did was rejected. The tribunal referred to Rule 34 and also said the same result followed under Rule 37 because the complaints against those entities had no reasonable prospect of success.

The only substantive claim-outcome recorded in this judgment was that the tribunal lacked jurisdiction to hear the negligence and/or breach of duty at common law complaints giving rise to personal injury in Schedule 5 of the claim schedule. Those complaints were struck out. The judgment did not determine the underlying discrimination, whistleblowing, unfair dismissal, redundancy payment, notice pay or unlawful deduction claims on their merits.