Case 3300585/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. J. Cheung v North West Anglia NHS Foundation Trust OPEN PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2022
- Case reference
- 3300585/2021
- Decision date
- 11 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mason Appearances
- Venue
- Bury St Edmunds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. J. Cheung
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Cheung, a doctor employed by North West Anglia NHS Foundation Trust from 30 July 2019 to 25 August 2020, presented a claim on 20 January 2021. The claim was said to include breach of contract, failure to comply with the Working Time Regulations, and unlawful deduction from wages. At this open preliminary hearing, the tribunal first dealt with Mr Cheung's application for anonymity under Rule 50 and the respondent's application for an extension of time to file its response.
The anonymity application was refused. Mr Cheung said publication of the proceedings could affect his reputation and future employment prospects, but the judge held that the circumstances were not exceptional and was not satisfied that an anonymity order was necessary in the interests of justice, to protect Convention rights, or to protect confidential information. The tribunal therefore gave full weight to open justice.
The respondent's late ET3 was allowed. Applying the Rule 20 discretion and the factors from Kwik Save Stores Ltd v Swain, the judge accepted the respondent's explanation that it did not become aware of the proceedings until December 2021, accepted that the hospital acted promptly once aware, and found there was no deliberate failure to respond. The judge also noted that the claim as pleaded lacked sufficient factual detail, that Mr Cheung had not complied with the order for further particulars, and that it was not possible at that stage to assess the merits of the substantive claim. The balance of prejudice was found to favour the respondent, particularly as the claimant had sought postponement of the earlier preliminary hearing.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Claimant's Rule 50 anonymity application was refused. The judge was not satisfied that an order was necessary in the interests of justice, to protect Convention rights, or to protect confidential information. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Respondent's application for an extension of time to present its ET3 was granted under Rule 20. The judge accepted the explanation for delay, found the proposed defence had some merit, and concluded that prejudice favoured the respondent. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Rule 50 anonymity test
- Rule 20 extension of time discretion
- Kwik Save Stores Ltd v Swain factors
- 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.