Case 6017329/2025 · Employment Tribunal

Ms P Rusinga v Barts Health NHS Trust — 2026

Case reference: 6017329/2025
Decision date: 15 January 2026
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge B Elgot Representation

Indexed: 18 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Ms P Rusinga

Respondent

Barts Health NHS Trust

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The claimant did not attend and was not represented at the hearing. The Tribunal proceeded in her absence under Rule 47 after considering the reasons for her absence and the information available.

The respondent's strike-out application succeeded. The Tribunal struck out all claims because the claimant had not complied with tribunal orders made on 11 September 2025 and 17 October 2025, and because the constructive unfair dismissal and discrimination complaints were out of time. The Tribunal declined to extend time and found it had no jurisdiction to hear the claims.

Claims and outcomes

5 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Constructive dismissal	The judgment refers to this as a claim of constructive unfair dismissal and finds it was presented out of time under section 111 Employment Rights Act 1996.	Struck out	—	—
Sex discrimination	The discrimination complaint was struck out because it was out of time under section 123 Equality Act 2010 and the Tribunal did not consider it just and equitable to extend time.	Struck out	Sex	—
Race discrimination	The discrimination complaint was struck out because it was out of time under section 123 Equality Act 2010 and the Tribunal did not consider it just and equitable to extend time.	Struck out	Race	—
Disability discrimination	The discrimination complaint was struck out because it was out of time under section 123 Equality Act 2010 and the Tribunal did not consider it just and equitable to extend time.	Struck out	Disability	—
Age discrimination	The discrimination complaint was struck out because it was out of time under section 123 Equality Act 2010 and the Tribunal did not consider it just and equitable to extend time.	Struck out	Age	—

Legal tests applied

6 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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.