Dorset HealthCare University NHS Foundation Trust

Case Summary

Employment Judge Rayner granted the respondent's application to strike out the claimant’s allegation that she was subject to detriment for whistle blowing due to a negative reference provided to Weymouth Manor care home. The judge concluded there is no reasonable prospect of the claimant proving her case.

The employment judge found that the claimant had no reasonable prospect of proving her whistleblowing detriment claim regarding the negative reference, and therefore struck out the allegation at a preliminary stage.

• •negative reference provided by respondent to Weymouth Manor care home, no reasonable prospect of proving the claimant was subject to detriment for whistleblowing

1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant v Respondent Mrs A Ferreira da Silva Couto Dorset HealthCare University NHS Foundation Trust Considered and determined on the papers without a hearing on 6 June 2025 By Employment Judge Rayner STRIKE OUT JUDGMENT 1. The Respondent's application to strike out the claimant’s allegation that she was subject to detriment for whistle blowing, by the respondent providing a negative reference to the Weymouth Manor Care home, is granted. 2. The allegation made within paragraph 4.1.26 of the case management order of 14 and 15 January 2025 that the Claimant was subject to detriment for whistle blowing by the respondent providing a negative reference in respect of the claimant to the Weymouth Manor Care home is struck out. 3. The Claimant's remaining allegations, including any further allegations of detriment under paragraph 4.1.26 of the case management order, will continue and be determined at a final hearing listed for 12 days from the 19 November 2025 Reasons 1. The Respondent applies to strike out allegation 4.1.26 of the case management order made by Employment Judge Dawson following a case management hearing and preliminary hearing on the 14 and 15 January 2025. 2. The allegation made by the Claimant was that the Respondent had given references in respect of the Claimant which applied to a final written warning. 3. The strikeout application was not addressed and, on the 17 May 2025, wrote to the employment tribunal seeking determination of their application on the papers and again copying their correspondence to the Claimant. 4. The thrust of the Respondent's application is that the Claimant has no reasonable prospect of proving one of the matters she refers to in her ET1, and 2 that therefore any claim in respect of the reference allegedly given to Weymouth Manor care home should be struck out. 5. The partie…