Case 8000628/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Ms K Taylor v Grampian Health Board st and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 8000628/2025
- Decision date
- 18 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge McFatridge
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Ms K Taylor
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the preliminary hearing on 26 November 2025, the tribunal considered whether Ms Taylor had the two years’ continuous service needed for her constructive unfair dismissal claim. It found that her earlier fixed-term engagement ended on 31 March 2024 and her later employment began on 15 April 2024, leaving a definite gap in employment. Applying the continuous employment provisions in the Employment Rights Act 1996, the tribunal held that the gap broke continuity and that the claim could not proceed for want of qualifying service.
The tribunal also refused the claimant’s application to amend her claim. It applied the Selkent principles and looked at the balance of prejudice. It accepted that the claimant had been trying to assist the tribunal, but found that the proposed fresh claim form would effectively require the case to start again. The tribunal noted that several of the proposed claims were not pleaded in the original ET1, some lacked sufficient specification, and the proposed whistleblowing elements linked to her previous employment were time-barred.
In relation to the proposed sex discrimination and victimisation claims, the tribunal recorded that sex discrimination had not been foreshadowed in the original claim and that no adequate reason was given for not including it earlier. It also found that the victimisation allegations did not identify a protected act related to a protected characteristic. The tribunal therefore refused the amendment. The remaining claims of direct disability discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, failure to make reasonable adjustments, and harassment related to disability were allowed to proceed to a hearing. The tribunal noted that disability status was still contested at that stage and that the claimant could refer to additional material as background within the existing pleadings.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the claimant’s constructive unfair dismissal claim because she did not have two years’ qualifying service. It found a break in continuity between the fixed-term contract ending on 31 March 2024 and the later contract starting on 15 April 2024. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Selkent principles
- s.211 ERA 1996
- s.212 ERA 1996
- s.235 ERA 1996
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.