Case 2302567/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Vikki Grater v South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust — 2023
- Case reference
- 2302567/2023
- Decision date
- 20 November 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Evans
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Vikki Grater
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal dismissed the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint and disability discrimination complaint. In each case, the judgment states that the claim was presented out of time and that the Tribunal therefore had no jurisdiction to hear it.
The Tribunal also dismissed the claimant's complaint for "other payments". The judgment states that this was a complaint about how the claimant's application for ill-health early retirement was dealt with, and that the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear such a claim. These were all of the claimant's complaints, so the claim was dismissed and brought to an end.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed because the claim was presented out of time and the Tribunal found it had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Dismissed because the claim was presented out of time and the Tribunal found it had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Other | The judgment describes this as a complaint for "other payments" about how the claimant's application for ill-health early retirement was dealt with; the Tribunal found it had no jurisdiction to hear such a claim. | 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.