Case 2403352/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Ms L Thomas v 1) Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 2) Professor Mark Pugh — 2017
- Case reference
- 2403352/2017
- Decision date
- 7 November 2017
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Franey
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms L Thomas
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 1 November 2017, Employment Judge Franey ordered that all complaints seeking to establish personal liability on the part of Professor Mark Pugh, the second respondent, were dismissed upon withdrawal. The second respondent was removed from the proceedings under Rule 34.
The judgment stated that this order did not affect the remaining complaints against Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, including those in which it was said to be vicariously liable for the actions of the second respondent. No substantive liability findings or remedy awards were made in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | All complaints seeking to establish personal liability on the second respondent were dismissed upon withdrawal and he was removed from the proceedings under Rule 34. The judgment does not identify the underlying substantive claim types in this order. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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
- Open official judgment 4 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.