Case 3304723/2024 · Employment Tribunal
MR GEORGE FERGUSON-HAIZEL v Hertfordshire Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust and Others — 2025
- Case reference
- 3304723/2024
- Decision date
- 13 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Skehan Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
MR GEORGE FERGUSON-HAIZEL
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 14 November 2024, the claimant, represented by counsel, confirmed that he remained employed by the respondent. In light of that position, he wished to withdraw the unfair dismissal claim. He also confirmed that, after further consideration, he wished to withdraw the unauthorised deduction from wages claim and the unpaid holiday pay claim.
The tribunal recorded that there had been no request at the time of withdrawal to reserve the right to bring a further claim. It also considered the background to the withdrawals and concluded that there were no circumstances making it appropriate to reserve that right. The tribunal therefore issued dismissal judgments under Rule 52 for each withdrawn claim.
The written reasons note that the claimant's remaining claims were unaffected by the dismissal judgment. Those remaining claims were direct race discrimination, direct age discrimination, indirect race discrimination, victimisation, and detriment on the grounds that he made a protected disclosure.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claimant confirmed at the hearing on 14 November 2024 that he remained employed and wished to withdraw the unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal dismissed the claim under Rule 52 following withdrawal. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claimant, through counsel, confirmed he wished to withdraw the unauthorised deduction from wages claim after further consideration. The tribunal dismissed the claim under Rule 52 following withdrawal. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The claimant also withdrew the unpaid holiday pay claim at the hearing. The tribunal dismissed the claim under Rule 52 following withdrawal. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 51
- Rule 52
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.