Case 6021423/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Dr H McRobie v University of Law Bloomsbury & Others — 2025
- Case reference
- 6021423/2024
- Decision date
- 15 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brown
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Dr H McRobie
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 11 August 2025, Employment Judge A M Snelson determined the case on the papers. The Tribunal struck out the Claimant's claims against the individual Respondents Sandie Gaines, Sarah Corbett, Nicolas Ross and Nadia Richardson, and also struck out her complaint of unfair dismissal.
The reasons record that, by letter dated 18 June 2025 issued on the instructions of Employment Judge Brown, the Claimant was warned that those claims were being considered for strike out and was given until 4 July 2025 to explain why they should not be struck out. The Tribunal received no response.
The Tribunal therefore struck out the claims on the ground that they had no reasonable prospect of success. The judgment states that the other claims were unaffected.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Claims against the individual Respondents Sandie Gaines, Sarah Corbett, Nicolas Ross and Nadia Richardson were struck out on the ground that they had no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The Claimant's complaint of unfair dismissal was struck out on the ground that it had 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.