Case 6011974/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Williams v NHS Coventry and Warwickshire Integrated Care Board — 2025
- Case reference
- 6011974/2024
- Decision date
- 21 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Maxwell Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Williams
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant brought age and sex discrimination claims against NHS Coventry and Warwickshire Integrated Care Board concerning unsuccessful job applications. The claims concerning an unsuccessful job application in 2021 were dismissed on withdrawal.
The tribunal held that it was just and equitable to extend time for the Claimant's age and sex discrimination claims concerning two unsuccessful job applications in 2022. The judgment does not record any remedy, panel members, or determination of the merits of the 2022 claims.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | The claim of age discrimination with respect to the Claimant's unsuccessful job application in 2021 was dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Age | — |
| Sex discrimination | The claim of sex discrimination with respect to the Claimant's unsuccessful job application in 2021 was dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Sex | — |
| Age discrimination | The tribunal held that it was just and equitable to extend time for the Claimant's age discrimination claims with respect to two unsuccessful job applications in 2022. The judgment does not determine the merits of those claims. | Other | Age | — |
| Sex discrimination | The tribunal held that it was just and equitable to extend time for the Claimant's sex discrimination claims with respect to two unsuccessful job applications in 2022. The judgment does not determine the merits of those claims. | Other | Sex | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- just and equitable to extend time
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.