Case 2402874/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr F Sair v Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust — 2021
- Case reference
- 2402874/2021
- Decision date
- 3 December 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Slater REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr F Sair
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningIn a preliminary judgment at Manchester on 15 November 2021, Employment Judge Slater recorded that the tribunal had jurisdiction to consider Mr F Sair's complaint of victimisation. The judgment also noted the respondent's concession that Mr Sair was a contract worker for the purposes of section 41 Equality Act 2010, whose services were supplied to the respondent as the principal.
The tribunal did not finally determine the harassment complaints at this stage. It recorded that the issue of whether it had jurisdiction to consider those complaints would be dealt with at the final hearing. The written record states that reasons were given orally and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the written record being sent.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Victimisation | Preliminary jurisdiction ruling: the tribunal held it had jurisdiction to consider the victimisation complaint. This was not a merits finding. | Upheld | — | — |
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.