Case 2300382/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss C. Nicholls v Kings College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and 1 other — 2021
- Case reference
- 2300382/2019
- Decision date
- 24 May 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sage Representation
- Venue
- London South Croydon
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Miss C. Nicholls
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a telephone hearing on 24 May 2021, Employment Judge Sage dealt with preliminary issues in Miss Nicholls' disability discrimination proceedings against Kings College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and Ms Andelson. The judgment records that the claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by counsel.
The tribunal held that the claimant's claims relating to incidents before 2 September 2018 were out of time and dismissed them. It also struck out the disability-related harassment claims identified at paragraphs 8(j) to (l) of the list of issues and the reasonable adjustments claim at paragraph 19(b), on the basis that those claims had no reasonable prospect of success. No remedy was determined in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Claims in respect of incidents that occurred before 2 September 2018 were found to be out of time and dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The disability-related harassment claims in the list of issues at paragraphs 8(j) to (l) were struck out because they had no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The reasonable adjustments claim at paragraph 19(b) was struck out because it had no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | Disability | — |
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.