The ET had to deal with wide-ranging claims of whistleblowing detriment based on 32 asserted protected disclosures, unlawful sex and race discrimination, in addition to claims of ordinary and automatic unfair and wrongful dismissal. The ET held that the disciplinary allegations all concerned the Claimant's personal (rather than professional) conduct and accordingly, under Maintaining High Professional Standards in the Modern NHS (MHPS) it was not necessary for the Trust to have an independent doctor on the disciplinary panel constituted to determine whether or not the allegations were proved and if so what sanction should be applied. The Claimant appealed under the single ground that the ET was in error of law in failing properly to characterise the conduct in issue (or some of it) as raising professional conduct and/or professional capability concerns, and not just personal conduct concerns.

The EAT dismissed the appeal. The ET was as a matter of fact and law entitled and right to find that they had nothing to do with the exercise of the Claimant's "clinical or professional conduct or competence". The ET did not err in law in reaching those conclusions.