Case 2304031/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs J Russell v The Chestnuts Surgery (a partnership) — 2022
- Case reference
- 2304031/2022
- Decision date
- 26 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright
- Panel members
- Ms J Cook, Mr C Rogers
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs J Russell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was employed as a Health Care Assistant by the respondent from 8/10/2018 until 18/8/2022. The Tribunal considered evidence about communications concerning the claimant drawing her NHS pension, a possible retirement and return, her resignation on 21/7/2022, and a later reference connected with a conditional job offer from Medway Hospital.
The Tribunal found that the claimant's resignation of 21/7/2022 was express and unequivocal. It concluded there was no dismissal by the respondent, so the unfair dismissal claim failed.
The direct age discrimination claim was based on a statement in the respondent's reference that the claimant had indicated she was looking to retire before Christmas. The Tribunal concluded that the alleged less favourable treatment was the withdrawal of the job offer by MMH, not treatment by the respondent, and that MMH was not a respondent to the claim. The Equality Act claims were therefore not well-founded and were dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The Tribunal found the claimant's resignation of 21/7/2022 was express and unequivocal, so there was no dismissal by the respondent. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Age discrimination | The direct age discrimination claim concerned the statement in a reference that the claimant had indicated she was looking to retire before Christmas. The Tribunal found the alleged less favourable treatment was withdrawal of a job offer by MMH, which was not a respondent. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Holiday pay | The claimant withdrew her claim for holiday pay at the outset of the hearing. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- s.5 Equality Act 2010
- s.13 Equality Act 2010
- s.39(2)(d) Equality Act 2010
- Shamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary [2003] ICR 337
- s.94(1) Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.95 Employment Rights Act 1996
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.