Case 6001366/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Esma Williams v University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust — 2025
- Case reference
- 6001366/2024
- Decision date
- 12 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bradford Representation
- Venue
- Southampton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Esma Williams
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal dismissed Ms Esma Williams's complaint of unfair dismissal under Part X Employment Rights Act 1996, finding that it was not well-founded.
The Tribunal found that the claimant's protected disclosure detriment claims under s47B Employment Rights Act 1996 arising in and before June 2023 were brought outside the time limit in s48. It found that the claimant had not established that it was not reasonably practicable to bring those claims in time, and held that it had no jurisdiction to hear them.
The Tribunal also dismissed the claimant's s47B detriment claim that her dismissal on 23 October 2023 was accelerated because of a protected disclosure, finding that claim not well-founded. Her complaint of automatically unfair dismissal under s103A Employment Rights Act 1996 was likewise found not well-founded and dismissed.
The judgment records no monetary remedy, and no award was made in the written judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The ordinary unfair dismissal complaint under Part X Employment Rights Act 1996 was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The s47B protected disclosure detriment claims arising in and before June 2023 were found to be out of time under s48 Employment Rights Act 1996; the Tribunal found the claimant had not established that it was not reasonably practicable to bring them in time and held that it had no jurisdiction to hear them. | Other | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The s47B detriment claim that the claimant's dismissal on 23 October 2023 was accelerated because of a protected disclosure was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The automatically unfair dismissal complaint under s103A Employment Rights Act 1996 was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- Part X Employment Rights Act 1996
- s47B Employment Rights Act 1996
- s48 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s103A Employment Rights Act 1996
- not reasonably practicable
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.