Ms A Nash v Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem) — 2026

The tribunal dismissed Ms A Nash's application under Rule 49 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 to prevent or restrict public disclosure in her proceedings against OFGEM. Her age discrimination and victimisation claims had not yet been listed for a full merits hearing. The judge recorded that an application to amend the claim to include allegations concerning, among other claims, disability discrimination had been refused. A restricted reporting order under Rule 49(3)(d) was therefore not applicable.

Ms Nash sought privacy for medical matters in her claim. She said stigma surrounding her conditions, particularly the menopause, would affect her future employment, personal life and reputation. She also said that without anonymity she would feel limited in presenting health matters at a public hearing. She relied on medical evidence of self-harm, which she linked to the stress of attending hearings. OFGEM took a largely neutral position and referred the tribunal to Fallows on the principles governing restrictions on open justice.

The tribunal found that Ms Nash's medical conditions and records engaged her Article 8 privacy rights. Applying the balance with open justice and freedom of expression under Articles 6 and 10, it required clear and cogent evidence of harm justifying a restriction. Ms Nash had provided no supporting evidence of the claimed effects on employment, relationships or reputation beyond broad statements. The judge accepted that the proceedings caused her stress but found that her evidence linked self-harm to attending hearings generally rather than specific harm to her privacy. The evidence did not justify departing from open justice. The judge reminded her that she could request procedural reasonable adjustments to assist participation. No monetary remedy was recorded.