Case 3302812/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss XA Samson v London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust — 2020
- Case reference
- 3302812/2020
- Decision date
- 7 December 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge KJ Palmer
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss XA Samson
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a remote hearing on the papers before Employment Judge KJ Palmer on 25 November 2020. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by counsel. The judgment deals only with preliminary and jurisdictional issues and records no substantive liability or remedy award.
Claims and outcomes
4 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harassment | The claimant sought to add a further harassment claim based on the respondent's letter to the Tribunal seeking an Unless Order. The judgment says the application was dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The claimant's first breach of contract claim, alleging that she was dismissed and that the respondent failed to follow a disciplinary procedure, was struck out and dismissed. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract claim set out at paragraph 11.3, described as a personal injury claim, was dismissed because the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract claim set out at paragraph 11.4, described as a further attempt to claim damages for failure to follow a contractual disciplinary procedure, was dismissed because the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.