Case 6010826/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Dr A Kumar v General Medical Council — 2025
- Case reference
- 6010826/2025
- Decision date
- 13 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Dr A Kumar
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing at London Central, Employment Judge A M Snelson sat alone and heard the claimant in person and counsel for the respondent.
The Tribunal determined that the complaint of direct disability discrimination was dismissed on withdrawal. The remaining complaints, described as disability-related harassment, indirect disability discrimination and victimisation, were struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The complaint of direct disability discrimination was dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The complaint was described as disability-related harassment and was struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The complaint of indirect disability discrimination was struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | The complaint of victimisation was struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | — | — |
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.