Case 3304557/2022 · Employment Tribunal

Mr Stuart Smith v Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust — 2025

Case reference: 3304557/2022
Decision date: 25 June 2025
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge M Warren Members
Venue: Norwich
Panel members: Ms L Davies, Mrs N Christofi

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr Stuart Smith

Respondent

Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal, sitting at Norwich by CVP before Employment Judge M Warren with Ms L Davies and Mrs N Christofi, determined three complaints in its judgment dated 2 June 2025 and sent to the parties on 25 June 2025. It dismissed the complaint of failure to make reasonable adjustments for disability and dismissed the complaint of unfair dismissal.

The tribunal upheld the complaint of direct sex discrimination. The judgment does not set out written reasons in the extracted text, and it records that remedy would be determined separately.

Remedy was reserved to a CVP hearing listed for 27 and 28 October 2025. No monetary award is recorded in this judgment.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Disability discrimination	Complaint of failure to make reasonable adjustments for disability; dismissed.	Dismissed	Disability	—
Unfair dismissal	Recorded from the judgment.	Dismissed	—	—
Sex discrimination	Complaint of direct sex discrimination; succeeded. Remedy was left to a later hearing.	Upheld	Sex	—

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.