Redvers v NHS Sussex Integrated Care Board & Mr Adam Doyle Thread 3

[fanOfBen]

TT summary:

Dr Redvers, a named GP safeguarding lead, has a constructive dismissal case. Clinical concerns were raised about a specific doctor at WellBN, a Brighton GP practice. She claims that as a result of escalating those claims from 2020 onwards, she was constructively dismissed.

Her legal claim is discrimination on the grounds of her employer’s perception she had gender critical beliefs and on the grounds of her protected belief in evidence-based medicine (EBM). The respondent defends the latter claim by pleading that EBM is just an opinion.

Earlier coverage of this hearing can be found on TT's Substack at:
t.co/TwXeLCDnpt

TT report what they hear in good faith but do not provide a verbatim transcript of the hearing.

TT's list of abbreviations:

J - Judge Katherine Andrews (sitting alone)
DR/C - Doctor Sarah Redvers, claimant
CM/RB - Chris Milsom, claimant barrister
CE/RB - Charlotte Elves, Claimant Barrister
PD - Peter Daly, solicitor for the C

NHSSICB/R1 - NHS Sussex Integrated Care Board, first respondent
AD/R2 - Adam Doyle, second respondent, CEO of R1 2019-2025
Rs - collectively the respondents
RB/BW - Ben Williams, Respondent's barrister
EBM - Evidence-based medicine
SG - Safeguarding

WB - WellBN, Brighton based GP practice
GC - Gender Critical or sex realist beliefs
GI - Gender Identity belief
WS - Witness Statement
Ix - investigation
Gx - grievance
Cx - complaint

SH/DSH - Dr Sam Hall, GP at WellBN, Trustee - the Clare Project (TCP), Clinical Lead - Trans Health Hub, GIC Partner - Trans Health Improvement Board at R1, trans-identified female
DA - Dusty Amroliwala, ext consultant, investigated complaint filed by DSH against C
LB - Lola Banjoko, Exec Managing Director, chair of Trans Health Improvement Board, advised R1 on trans matters
NC - Nikky Cambridge, former trustee of TCP

AC - Allison Cannon, Chief Nursing Officer, R1, tasked w implementing the recommendations of the 1st grievance outcome
CCD - Dr Claire Cochrane-Dyet, Dep Medical Director for System Improvement & Professional Standards, NHSE, commissioned Warshafsky Report
HD - Dr Hannah Davies, Deputy Chief Medical Office, R1

SD - Samantha Durrant, Lay vice chair until July 2022, 1st grievance manager
NE - Naomi Ellis, dep director of Safeguarding, R1
MF - Dr Mary Flynn, Named GP for Safeguarding, also filed g/x in relation to Amroliwala Report
PF - Pennie Ford, Executive Managing Director, R1, 2nd grievance manager

EG - Dr Elizabeth Gill, Chief Medical Officer, R1
HH - Hannah Hamilton, Chief financial officer, R1, 2nd grievance appeal manager
BJ - Dr Becky Jarvis, clinical lead for mental health, R1
TM - Tom Micklewright, managing partner of Lime Tree Surgery

IM - Ian Mundy, HR Consultant, Your Consultancy, 1st grievance investigator
MP - Mark Power, interim Chief People Officer (until April 2022), R1, managed Amroliwala investigation
RR - Dr Rebecca Richards, GP partner, Lime Tree Surgery, raised concerns to C about SH
AR - Anne Robson, Interim Chief People Officer (April -August 2022), R1

DS - Dr Dinesh Sinha, Chief Medical Officer (June 2022 - April 2024), Chair of Trans Health Improvement Board (THIB)
MS - Mark Smith, Chief People Officer, R1 (Aug 2022 - Jan 2025) Acting CEO (Jan 2025 - June 2025) Deputy CEO & Director of Transition (June 2025 - present)
RW - Dr Robin Warshafsky, GP NHSE, Author of Warshafsky Report (WR)

Thread 1:
www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5586672-wellbn-brighton-gp-practice-do-not-believe-in-evidence-based-medicine-tt-at-employment-tribunal-tomorrow

Thread 2:
www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5588924-redvers-v-nhs-sussex-integrated-care-board-mr-adam-doyle-thread-2

The “Incompetence Defence”
This is the related argument that adverse decisions or treatment resulted from managerial incompetence, errors, or a shambolic process, rather than discriminatory motives (conscious or subconscious).

Motives aren't relevant to discrimination claims. The incompetence defence would have to show that adverse decisions were incompetence, errors or a shambolic process all of which were entirely disconnected to any protected characteristic. You don't need to have discriminatory motives (conscious or unconscious) to be unlawfully discriminatory.

Is there any scope for the claimant to win her constructive dismissal case without the discrimination claim? I mean, if the intense and prolonged distress and reputational damage that she suffered could be put down to bastardy and incompetance, to the exclusion of anything discriminatory, could the judge still find in her favour?

I don't know if that can be the result of the tribunal, but the awards would be different; constructive dismissal is a breach of the employment contract, so now it's a statutory formula for pay based on your age, how long have you been employed there, what are your bonus entitlements, annual leave and so forth.

If the constructive dismissal is for discriminatory reasons then there's more compensation, injury to feelings, interest paid from the date of the discriminatory act or acts etc. The calculus is different.

And paid for by us.

I will take bets that this practices is in Brighton, the epicentre of trans zealotry.

Well that was a ride, just re read, based on CM submissions AD lied all over the place and not just to the tribunal.

Demolished BW defence, where relied on case law prior he the EQA.

and in ignoring the case of Anya vs Oxford something, re we are mean to everyone and stupid to boot.

and his instructing solicitor ignored Claimants solicitor with regard to agreeing a definition of GC beliefs.

and BW failed to put timeline of CASS review etc in his subs and analysis, and pissed the judge off.

CM on the other hand having met the requirements of the judge

have I got that right

In this case and SP’s holding the corporate body and named individuals personally to account brings the decision making process to the forefront of the proceedings. Those named individuals then seem to have no problem naming/blaming/shaming others including secretarial staff to shift and share the blame. What happened to honourably sticking your hand up and saying ‘ it was me/us gov, I/we made a mistake’, how do we put it right’?
They thought, I surmise, being management etc of big organisation with extensive HR and legal advice and seemingly limitless public funds it would provide anonymity and protection from accountability. Those brave enough to challenge this unlawful ideology/medical treatment of minors too often saw their careers trashed on the alter of unlawful practices these organisations championed. Top management would be foolish not to acknowledge they may be named and individually held accountable in the future. More cases to come I think.

Sarah is being interviewed for the BBC News now. That's a new departure for the Beeb!

Anyone watching BBC 6 o'clock news? Dr.Sarah Redvers case being reported! In some depth!

Wow!

Covering the case on BBC 6 o’clock news now! Come in half way through but seems to be sympathetic to Sarah (who is interviewed).

Watching now. Great to see this so accurately reported.

Long piece, with no contrary view from the trans-lobby!

Fantastic! Missed this but will dig out on Iplayer.

Thanks for responding to my question, @MyAmpleSheep .

Blimey! That was a surprise. The Trust is saying that they will wait for the outcome of the tribunal before commenting. A bit of a back pedal from what they were saying about her at the beginning of the Tribunal.

Wonder why the focus on this case - maybe as linked to other proven scandals?

It was refreshing the way they conducted this. Looks like their position has shifted.

I loved 'do you think this is a medical scandal then?'

Don't you then you fucking muppet?

It’s great that Sarah got to use the phrase medical scandal! And the reporter didn’t challenge the strong claim that’s thus far been dismissed. I couldn’t quite believe it, this is pretty huge.

Just watched it. Seems fair by usual BBC standards. Explained that Hall is a 'trans man, so born female'. Reporter was Alison Holt, BBC social affairs editor, who I think most FWR women agree has generally been pretty good.

Hove actually

A good BBC article, very clear the report backed up the safeguarding concerns SR raised.

I really hope SR wins her case.

Another "wins the internet" post.

Wellbn is just on border of Brighton and Hove. I am a heterosexual patient there. I have been following this thread. Am gobsmacked

You know whose diary I would really like to see in all of this?

The one Ben Williams is keeping in preparation for his future non-factual novel. I bet he has lots of notes about totally made up discussions with the imaginary characters of "Badam Moyle", "Dr Ham Sall" and others who all work for the fictional "Integrated Care Board of NHS Mussex". Gonna be a page turner!