Case 2403497/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Dr D Gandecha v St Helens and Knowsley Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust — 2022
- Case reference
- 2403497/2020
- Decision date
- 23 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Benson
- Venue
- Manchester
- Panel members
- Ms J K Williamson, Ms E Cadbury
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Dr D Gandecha
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal unanimously found that the claimant was not constructively dismissed. The unfair dismissal claim therefore failed.
The tribunal also did not uphold the claims of direct race discrimination, direct age discrimination, victimisation, and harassment related to race. All claims were dismissed. Oral reasons were given at the hearing, and the written judgment records no remedy award.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was not constructively dismissed and that the unfair dismissal claim failed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination was not upheld. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Age discrimination | Direct age discrimination was not upheld. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Victimisation | Victimisation was not upheld; the protected act or related protected characteristic is not identified in the judgment extract. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Harassment | Harassment related to race was not upheld. | 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.
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.