Case 2301490/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Slade v East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust — 2024
- Case reference
- 2301490/2022
- Decision date
- 16 May 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Curtis
- Venue
- London South
- Panel members
- Mrs N Christofi, Mr R Singh
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss J Slade
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe published judgment records that Miss J Slade brought claims against East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust and that the case was heard at London South Employment Tribunal on 14, 15 and 16 May 2024 before Employment Judge Curtis, Mrs N Christofi and Mr R Singh. The judgment does not set out separate findings on the individual causes of action in the published record.
The only substantive outcome recorded in the written judgment is that the claimant's claims fail and are dismissed. The record also states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the sending of the written record of the decision.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The published judgment does not give separate reasons for this claim; it records only that the claimant's claims failed and were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The published judgment does not give separate reasons for this claim; it records only that the claimant's claims failed and were dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The published judgment does not give separate reasons for this claim; it records only that the claimant's claims failed and were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.