Case 2404864/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs R Young v Bridgewater Community Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust — 2026
- Case reference
- 2404864/2024
- Decision date
- 24 August 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Slater
- Venue
- Manchester
- Panel members
- Mr A Clarke, Mr B J McCaughey
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs R Young
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal unanimously dismissed Mrs R Young's complaints of disability discrimination, Equality Act constructive dismissal and constructive unfair dismissal against Bridgewater Community Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust. It found all three categories of complaint not well founded. The judgment covered case numbers 2404864/2024 and 2407296/2024, following a hearing at Manchester on 17–21 and 24 August 2026.
Summary reasons were given orally at the hearing. The written judgment records the outcomes but does not set out the underlying factual findings or the legal reasoning for dismissing the complaints. It records no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The disability discrimination complaints were dismissed as not well founded. The judgment does not specify their individual statutory forms. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Constructive dismissal | The separately listed complaint of Equality Act constructive dismissal was dismissed as not well founded. The judgment does not separately identify the protected characteristic for this complaint. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Constructive dismissal | Constructive unfair dismissal; dismissed as not well founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.