Case 2501333/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr F Qureshi v County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust — 2025
- Case reference
- 2501333/2024
- Decision date
- 2 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Moss Appearances
- Venue
- Newcastle
Parties
2 namedKey findings
Tribunal's reasoningLiability for unfair dismissal had been conceded by the Respondent on 27 March 2025. The remedy hearing took place at Newcastle on 2 September 2025 before Employment Judge Moss sitting alone, with both parties represented by counsel. The Claimant had been employed as a Doctor since 4 January 2021 and had resigned with immediate effect on 22 January 2024 after being told he could only book ad hoc bank work via the Dagny mobile application.
The Tribunal found that the Claimant had taken reasonable steps to mitigate his loss, including taking agency work at QEHKL (a 215-mile commute) before securing a 5-year radiology training programme commencing 2 September 2024 at significantly reduced earnings. The Tribunal declined to apply an ACAS uplift, finding that the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures did not apply because there was no culpable conduct on the Claimant's part (applying Holmes v Qinetiq Ltd). The Tribunal allowed claims for employer pension contribution loss (despite the Claimant having opted out of his new employer's scheme for affordability reasons) and for rolled-up holiday pay.
The basic award was £1,929 (3 weeks x statutory cap of £643). The compensatory award after grossing up at 40% marginal rate was £83,295.93. Total award £85,224.93. The prescribed element for recoupment was £36,057.96 over the period 22 January 2024 to 2 September 2025; the balance payable was £49,166.97. The PDF text was truncated.
Claims and outcomes
1 claim adjudicated| Claim type | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Upheld | — | £85,225 |
Legal tests applied
4 referencesRemedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £85,225
- Basic award
- £1,929
- Compensatory award
- £83,296
Source document
Primary recordThe full judgment is available 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.