Case 2216109/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Anderson v NHS Blood & Transplant — 2025
- Case reference
- 2216109/2024
- Decision date
- 16 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Joffe Appearances
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss J Anderson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a short procedural judgment in Miss J Anderson v NHS Blood and Transplant, heard at London Central on 10 January 2025 before Employment Judge Joffe. The judgment records the appearances only and then deals with strike-out applications under Employment Tribunal Rule 37.
The tribunal held that the claim was not struck out under Rule 37(1)(c). It also held that the response was not struck out under Rule 37(1)(b). No substantive liability findings are recorded in the extracted text, and the judgment does not identify any remedy or make any award.
On the material provided, the decision is limited to allowing both sides to proceed. The judgment is dated 13 January 2025 and was sent to the parties on 16 January 2025.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment records only that the claim was not struck out under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(c); it does not decide the substantive claims on their merits. | Other | — | — |
| Other | The judgment records only that the response was not struck out under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(b); it does not decide the substantive claims on their merits. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(c)
- Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(b)
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.