Case 3304003/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs A D’Arcy v Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust — 2025
- Case reference
- 3304003/2023
- Decision date
- 22 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T Brown Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs A D’Arcy
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs A D’Arcy brought four discrimination complaints arising from comments said to have been made in May 2022 and August 2022, alleging sex discrimination and age discrimination in respect of each comment. She also brought a complaint under s.47B Employment Rights Act 1996 that she had been subjected to a detriment, and an unfair dismissal complaint on the basis of s.103A Employment Rights Act 1996.
The tribunal dismissed every complaint. Each of the sex discrimination, age discrimination, whistleblowing detriment, and unfair dismissal complaints was recorded as not well-founded and dismissed.
The written record states that oral reasons were given on 1 October 2025, and that no written reasons were requested at the hearing. The extracted text therefore records only the dispositive outcomes and does not set out the tribunal's detailed reasoning or any monetary remedy.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | Complaint about a May 2022 comment. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Age discrimination | Complaint about a May 2022 comment. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Sex discrimination | Complaint about an August 2022 comment. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Age discrimination | Complaint about an August 2022 comment. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Whistleblowing | Complaint under s.47B Employment Rights Act 1996 that the claimant was subjected to a detriment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Unfair dismissal complaint brought on the basis of s.103A Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.47B Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.103A Employment Rights Act 1996
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.