Case 2414248/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms R Moon v Lancashire and South Cumbria NHS Foundation Trust PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2022
- Case reference
- 2414248/2021
- Decision date
- 21 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shotter. The
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms R Moon
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing on whether Ms Moon had the status needed to pursue a public interest disclosure detriment claim under section 47B ERA 1996 and a victimisation claim under sections 27 and 39 Equality Act 2010. The respondent said she was an Associate Hospital Manager appointed under section 23(6) of the Mental Health Act 1983 and was neither an employee nor a worker. The Tribunal therefore addressed only employment status, not the merits of either substantive claim.
The Tribunal found that an agreement existed between Ms Moon and the Trust for her engagement as an Associate Hospital Manager. It relied on the application process, the honorary contract, the appointment letter, the training and appraisal material, the fee structure, wage slips, and the way the panel sitting arrangements operated in practice. It rejected the Trust's submission that section 23(6) of the Mental Health Act meant there could be no contract or intention to create legal relations, and held that the label 'honorary contract' did not determine the legal position.
On that basis, the Tribunal held that Ms Moon was a worker for the purposes of section 47B ERA 1996 and was also in employment under a contract personally to do work for the purposes of section 83(2)(a) Equality Act 2010. It found mutual obligations between the parties, including the Trust's obligation to offer sittings and pay fees when she accepted, and her own obligations relating to training, appraisal and minimum attendance. The Tribunal said section 23(6) of the Mental Health Act did not exclude worker or Equality Act protection, and it added that section 43K(1)(a) ERA 1996 might also apply if needed. The claim was therefore allowed to proceed to a final hearing.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | Preliminary issue only. The Tribunal held that Ms Moon was a worker for the purposes of section 47B ERA 1996, so the detriment claim could proceed to a final hearing; it did not decide the merits of any alleged detriment. | Other | — | — |
| Victimisation | Preliminary issue only. The Tribunal held that Ms Moon was in employment under a contract personally to do work for the purposes of sections 27 and 39 Equality Act 2010, so the victimisation claim could proceed to a final hearing; it did not decide the merits of the claim. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
11 references- section 47B ERA 1996
- section 230(3)(b) ERA 1996
- section 43K(1)(a) ERA 1996
- section 83(2)(a) Equality Act 2010
- Uber BV v Aslam
- Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher
- Pimlico Plumbers Ltd v Smith
- Nursing and Midwifery Council v Somerville
- Gilham v Ministry of Justice
- Hashwani v Jivraj
- Alemi v Mitchell
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.