Case 2206187/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs J Peters v Barchester Healthcare Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 2206187/2021
- Decision date
- 2 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Maidment Representation
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs J Peters
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that the claimant withdrew her complaint of indirect sex discrimination and withdrew specified complaints of direct discrimination because of belief. Those complaints were dismissed upon withdrawal.
The tribunal struck out the claimant's direct discrimination because of belief and harassment related to belief complaints at allegation 45 because they had no reasonable prospects of success. The unfair dismissal claim was struck out only in part; the claimant could continue to argue that the decision to dismiss was unreasonable on the limited grounds listed in the judgment, including policy coverage, risk to residents, remote working, evaluation of non-frontline care workers, procedural unfairness, and any acts found to be direct discrimination or harassment related to belief.
The judgment stated that the partial strike-out of the unfair dismissal claim precluded any argument that the respondent's vaccine policy involved interference with the claimant's human rights in terms of security of the person or her pleaded protected belief. No remedy was determined.
Claims and outcomes
5 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | The complaint of indirect sex discrimination was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Sex | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | Direct discrimination because of belief allegations at paragraphs 25, 26, 28, 29, 31, 33 and 34 of the particulars of claim were dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Religion or belief | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The complaint of direct discrimination because of belief at allegation 45 was struck out as having no reasonable prospects of success. | Struck out | Religion or belief | — |
| Harassment | The complaint of harassment related to belief at allegation 45 was struck out as having no reasonable prospects of success. | Struck out | Religion or belief | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The unfair dismissal claim was struck out in part but continued on limited grounds listed in the judgment. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- no reasonable prospects of success
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.