Case 3303216/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Macleod v Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust — 2024
- Case reference
- 3303216/2021
- Decision date
- 10 May 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anstis’ Order
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Macleod
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that an unless order required the claimant to provide a table of allegations identifying, among other things, the relevant case or submission number, date, actor, and legal claim. It held that the effect of the order dated 10 May 2024 was that case number 3303216/2021 and specified other case numbers had been dismissed.
For any claims not dismissed by the unless order, the tribunal considered whether a fair trial remained possible. It found that the claimant's materials did not show how the allegations could be case managed or fairly heard, noting the scale and complexity of the claims and the claimant's position that none had been withdrawn. Those remaining claims were struck out on the basis that it was no longer possible to have a fair hearing.
Claims and outcomes
9 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Procedural judgment. The claim was dismissed by effect of the unless order; the provided text is truncated and does not contain a merits determination. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Procedural judgment. Disability discrimination allegations are described in the order, but the claim was dismissed by effect of the unless order rather than determined on the merits. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Whistleblowing | Procedural judgment. The order refers to detriments for making protected disclosures and victimisation following whistleblowing; the claim was dismissed by effect of the unless order rather than determined on the merits. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | Procedural judgment. The claim type appears in the listing categories, and the case was dismissed by effect of the unless order; the provided text is truncated and does not contain a merits determination. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Procedural judgment. The claimant referred to unfair dismissal as a major part of the claim, but the claim was dismissed by effect of the unless order rather than determined on the merits. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Procedural judgment. The claim type appears in the listing categories, and the case was dismissed by effect of the unless order; the provided text is truncated and does not contain a merits determination. |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Minnoch v Interserve FM Ltd [2023] EAT 35
- Leeks v UCLH NHS Foundation Trust [2024] EAT 134
- unless order
- fair hearing
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.