Case 2600151/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms R MacGregor-Jackson v North Rutland Health Partnership — 2023
- Case reference
- 2600151/2023
- Decision date
- 28 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brewer Representation
- Venue
- Midlands East via CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms R MacGregor-Jackson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing on 22 June 2023 before Employment Judge Brewer, the Tribunal dismissed Ms R MacGregor-Jackson’s unfair dismissal claim because it held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear it. The judgment does not set out any merits findings on the dismissal claim beyond that jurisdictional ruling.
The Tribunal also dealt with Equality Act 2010 claims, which it said had been presented out of time. It nevertheless held that it was just and equitable to extend time, so those claims could proceed to a final hearing. This judgment was therefore procedural only as to the Equality Act claims and did not determine liability on the merits.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed because the Tribunal held it did not have jurisdiction to hear the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The Equality Act 2010 claims were presented out of time, but the Tribunal held it was just and equitable to extend time so those claims could proceed to a final hearing. No merits determination was made in this judgment. | Other | Disability | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.