Case 2302227/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Mary Carter v Sussex Community NHS Foundation Trust — 2025
- Case reference
- 2302227/2024
- Decision date
- 8 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lumby REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Mary Carter
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningIn Ms Mary Carter v Sussex Community NHS Foundation Trust, the tribunal held a preliminary hearing in Croydon by CVP on 8 December 2025 before Employment Judge Lumby. It struck out all complaints except automatically unfair dismissal under Rule 38(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024, stating that the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to consider them and that they therefore had no reasonable prospect of success.
The written judgment does not separately list the complaints that were struck out, but the order states that the strike-out applied to all complaints other than automatically unfair dismissal. The record also notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days.
The automatically unfair dismissal complaint continues. This preliminary decision contains no merits finding on that claim and records no remedy or monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Struck out under Rule 38(1)(a) together with all complaints except automatically unfair dismissal; the written judgment does not separately list complaints. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Whistleblowing | Struck out under Rule 38(1)(a) together with all complaints except automatically unfair dismissal; the written judgment does not separately list complaints. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Struck out under Rule 38(1)(a) together with all complaints except automatically unfair dismissal; the written judgment does not separately list complaints. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | Struck out under Rule 38(1)(a) together with all complaints except automatically unfair dismissal; the written judgment does not separately list complaints. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The automatically unfair dismissal complaint continues; no merits determination or remedy is recorded in this preliminary judgment. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 38(1)(a) Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- no reasonable prospect 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.