Case 3307821/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms A R Yamjom v East London NHS Foundation Trust — 2023
- Case reference
- 3307821/2020
- Decision date
- 31 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge K Welch
- Venue
- Bury St Edmunds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms A R Yamjom
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal determined only whether the claimant’s ET1 should have been rejected under rule 12(1)(b) of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013 as being in a form that could not sensibly be responded to. The judge held that the claim should not be rejected. If the Employment Judge had seen the claimant’s Grounds of Complaint sent on 15 August 2020 together with the ET1, the claim was clearly capable of being sensibly responded to.
If those further particulars had not been seen when the claim was accepted, the judge still concluded that the ET1 identified the heads of claim and, taken together with the claimant’s grievance and resignation material known to the respondent, provided enough for the respondent to know the case it had to answer. The judge noted that the respondent had in fact filed a substantive response.
The tribunal therefore found that the earlier decision not to reject the claim was correct. The claimant’s amendment application and the respondent’s limitation arguments remained to be decided at a later open preliminary hearing.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | This judgment determined a preliminary procedural issue only: the claimant’s ET1 was not rejected under rule 12(1)(b) and the amendment application and substantive claims were left for a later hearing. No substantive employment claim was upheld or dismissed in this judgment. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- rule 12(1)(b) Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- rule 13(1)(b) Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- Trustee of the William Jones's Schools Foundation v Parry [2018] ICR 1807
- Birmingham City Council v Adams and ors (UKEAT/0048/17/LA)
- Chandhok v Tirkey [2015] ICR 527
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.