Colbert v Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust [2023] EWHC 1672 (KB) (04 July 2023)

Colbert v Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust [2023] EWHC 1672 (KB) (04 July 2023)

The claimant has no real prospect of establishing a contractual right to require attendance of all management witnesses or to unredacted disclosure of the Atkinson Report. The relevant provisions of the MHPS and MCP, properly construed, do not confer such rights. The disciplinary process provides mechanisms for the panel to determine witness relevance and for the claimant to make representations, with further recourse available on appeal. The court should not intervene to micromanage ongoing internal proceedings, especially where any alleged unfairness can be addressed within the process. No serious issue to be tried is established, and interim relief is refused.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 1672 (KB)
Parties
Applicant / Claimant: Dr Serryth Colbert; Respondent / Defendant: Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 July 2023
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application in Employment Disciplinary Proceedings / High Court, King's Bench Division, Hearing on Interim Relief
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Disciplinary Procedures, Interim Injunctions, Disclosure Obligations, Witness Attendance, Interpretation of Employment Contracts
Employment Law Contract Law Disciplinary Procedures Interim Injunctions Disclosure Obligations Witness Attendance Interpretation of Employment Contracts

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Serryth Colbert

Applicant / Claimant

Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust

Respondent / Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction Application in Employment Disciplinary Proceedings / High Court, King's Bench Division, Hearing on Interim Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is contractually entitled to require attendance of management witnesses at a disciplinary hearing
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to unredacted disclosure of documents, specifically the Atkinson Report, under the relevant contractual provisions

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant has no real prospect of establishing a contractual right to require attendance of all management witnesses or to unredacted disclosure of the Atkinson Report. The relevant provisions of the MHPS and MCP, properly construed, do not confer such rights. The disciplinary process provides mechanisms for the panel to determine witness relevance and for the claimant to make representations, with further recourse available on appeal. The court should not intervene to micromanage ongoing internal proceedings, especially where any alleged unfairness can be addressed within the process. No serious issue to be tried is established, and interim relief is refused.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Interim injunction refused
  • No order compelling attendance of management witnesses