Case 2402382/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss H Johnson v Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust — 2025
- Case reference
- 2402382/2022
- Decision date
- 27 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Cowen Non-Legal
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss H Johnson
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss H Johnson brought claims against Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust for unfair dismissal, direct race discrimination, and harassment. The hearing took place at Manchester on 4, 5 and 6 March 2025 before Employment Judge L Cowen sitting with non-legal members. The tribunal recorded that each claim was 'ill-founded'.
The judgment therefore dismissed all three claims. No liability findings beyond dismissal are set out in the written record provided, and no monetary remedy was awarded. The decision notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in accordance with the tribunal's usual process.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal described the claim as 'ill-founded' and dismissed it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment records a claim of direct race discrimination, described as 'ill-founded' and dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | The judgment records a harassment claim, dismissed as 'ill-founded' in the same race discrimination case. | Dismissed | Race | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.