Case 2601158/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs M Morgridge v Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust — 2021
- Case reference
- 2601158/2019
- Decision date
- 16 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hutchinson
- Venue
- Nottingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs M Morgridge
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a judgment on Mrs Morgridge's application dated 14 November 2020 to strike out Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust's response. The application was put on the grounds that the Respondent's conduct had been scandalous, unreasonable and vexatious, that Tribunal orders had not been complied with, that the response had no reasonable prospect of success, and that a fair hearing was no longer possible.
Employment Judge Hutchinson dismissed the application. The Judge accepted that there had been failings by the Respondent, including failure to meet a disclosure date ordered by Employment Judge Clark and failure to seek an extension before the deadline expired, but accepted the explanation given about difficulties completing preparation of the bundle. The Judge found that this did not amount to scandalous, unreasonable or vexatious behaviour.
The Judge was not satisfied at that stage that the Respondent had tried to stop documents being added to the bundle, nor that its application concerning consolidation was unreasonable. The Judge also found that there was not sufficient evidence at this stage to establish that documents had been tampered with or forged; those disputed allegations would require evidence and would be considered at the final hearing.
The Judge found that any non-compliance with Tribunal orders did not justify strike out because it did not affect the Tribunal's ability to hold a fair hearing, there was a good explanation for the non-compliance, and the case was not listed until November. The Judge also found that the response did not have no reasonable prospect of success because there were clear factual disputes requiring a hearing. No remedy or monetary award was made in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment determined the Claimant's application to strike out the Respondent's response under Rule 37, not the underlying substantive discrimination or other claims. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 37 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- Rule 2 overriding objective
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.