Case 3311247/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms J Davies v Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust — 2025
- Case reference
- 3311247/2023
- Decision date
- 11 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shastri-Hurst
- Venue
- Reading
- Panel members
- Ms E Gibson, Mr F Wright
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms J Davies
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard claims by Ms J Davies against Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust at Reading on 9, 10 and 11 December 2025 before Employment Judge Shastri-Hurst, Ms E Gibson and Mr F Wright.
The judgment records that the claim of failure to make reasonable adjustments was not well-founded and failed. It also records that the claim of harassment related to disability was not well-founded and failed. The available text states that reasons were given orally and does not include written reasons or any remedy award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that the claim of failure to make reasonable adjustments is not well-founded and fails. Written reasons are not included in the available text. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The judgment states that the claim of harassment related to disability is not well-founded and fails. Written reasons are not included in the available text. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.