Case 2303596/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Thurdy Campbell v Lewisham & Greenwich NHS Trust — 2024
- Case reference
- 2303596/2022
- Decision date
- 10 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Fowell Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Thurdy Campbell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was the claimant’s ninth claim and the only one concerning her dismissal. The tribunal noted that the first eight claims had already been heard in March 2023, and that findings of fact made at that hearing were relevant to the present claim.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | Complaint of automatically unfair dismissal under section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996, based on protected disclosures, struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success because the tribunal had already found at the earlier final hearing that the claimant did not make any protected disclosures. | Struck out | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Complaint of detriment on grounds of having made a protected disclosure under section 47B Employment Rights Act 1996 struck out for the same reason: the earlier findings meant there was no basis for the complaint to continue. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 47B Employment Rights Act 1996
- Rule 53 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure
- Rule 41 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure
- Rule 6 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure
- rule 37 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure
- overriding objective
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.