Case 2300997/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Robinson v Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust — 2023
- Case reference
- 2300997/2021
- Decision date
- 22 February 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Burge Appearances
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Robinson
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt an open preliminary hearing, the Tribunal held that it was just and equitable to extend time for the Claimant's claims of failure to comply with the duty to make reasonable adjustments and harassment related to disability. Those claims were permitted to continue.
The Tribunal also held that the Claimant's claims were not struck out for failure to comply with Tribunal Orders. No final liability decision or remedy award was made in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | At an open preliminary hearing, the Tribunal held it was just and equitable to extend time and that the claim of failure to comply with the duty to make reasonable adjustments should continue. The claim was not finally determined in this judgment. | Other | Disability | — |
| Harassment | At an open preliminary hearing, the Tribunal held it was just and equitable to extend time and that the harassment related to disability claim should continue. The claim was not finally determined in this judgment. | Other | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- just and equitable to extend time
- duty to make reasonable adjustments
- harassment related to 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.