Case 2304014/2022 · Employment Tribunal

Ourida Khaddar v University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust — 2024

Case reference: 2304014/2022
Decision date: 16 August 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge N Cox Date
Venue: LONDON SOUTH In person
Panel members: Julie Cook, Sue Evans

Indexed: 20 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Ourida Khaddar

Respondent

University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At a London South hearing held in person on 12 to 16 August 2024, Employment Judge N Cox sat with Tribunal Members Julie Cook and Sue Evans. The tribunal gave a unanimous judgment on Ms Khaddar's complaints against University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust. It recorded that the complaint of detriment arising from a public interest disclosure was not well-founded and dismissed it.

The tribunal also recorded that the complaints of direct race discrimination and harassment related to race were not well-founded and dismissed them. The written judgment contains no monetary remedy or award. It notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would only be provided if requested within the stated time limit.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Whistleblowing	The judgment describes this as a complaint of detriment arising from a public interest disclosure.	Dismissed	—	—
Race discrimination	The judgment describes this as direct race discrimination.	Dismissed	Race	—
Harassment	The judgment describes this as harassment related to race.	Dismissed	Race	—

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.