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

"Believed in little other than his own abilities."

Who is CM describing?

Of course it's Adam Doyle!!

TT
CM It helps us under stand whats happening. Why the ICB so far from basic standard care. whether a fear of backlash or ? ideology at heart of whats happening. MLF said left to subs to address the Cs beleif. Said lacked cogency until now but central to Cs profession. Cannot leave hanging in the air and then say not going to vhallenge on day 10

CM Re demonstrating allyship - may be vid relevent here but isnt detertative. Is an assertion that C is contriving a discrim case - matters crafted legally rather than what happening at the time. If suggested C doesnt believe her case is rejected.

CM She believes it to be true. She's correct on facts and law. Are sev attempts to impune Cs cred as a witness which go nowhere. She was a paradigm witness. Only followed the evid trail. Her evid demonstrate her beliefs in action - only follow the evid. ADs evid only covered his abilities

"Fundamental and preposterous lie"

ETA again he's on about Adam Doyle!

TT
CM He accepted Nortons 7 but rejected all in his evidence, including ? The incompatibe statements linger on central matters and not clarified or rectified. Its clear the evid wasnt honest - when 1st contact w DSH / 1st receiving PBs and CSH

July 22 mtg - failing to tell her he's been driving attempts against her w GMC> This contrast w his behav w her shows this. The Rs baseless suggestion its a contrived case is unworthy of MLF. Then disclosure:

MLF says the central point is when Cx comes in. When did we get the email re this? On day 1 of trial at 6pm. The paramaters were set by the trib and the Rs repeatedly said unnecces and too much but time and again docs have arrived

A fundamentla and proposterate lie in WS 4. Said no prior contact at all and he was sat in here while she was called a fantasist. He said he'd checked his email etc. We may never know what led to Weds deabcle - that lie may have remained on records w/out 4th order

Mentoring...

"Me thinks the respondent's doth protest too much"

Love CM!

Glad he's calling out AD lies

Me to, I am only reading it but now I've got an indelible impression of a Victorian chap with side whiskers wombling on and proclaiming Rumpole-ishly, but a lot more crap than Rumpole.

TT
On mentoring he protests too much. In a WS of 120 p it occupies 4 lines only. Its the R who put the mentoring centre stage and continue to do in writing. What is the urge of The Rs to keep digging here. No apology or retraction about her not believing re their first interaction

CM calling out BWs claim that Wednesdays debacle was a sign of Doyle's credibility

TT
How was long mtg set up? etc. We dont put mentoring centre stage - it is odd why Rs do. And to suggest is ADs credibility re WS 4! Said wasnt access to diary - he was asked for all contact and not just mentoring.

CM is a definitely more interesting to listen to than BW

that lie may have remained on records

Oh excellent, no dancing about trying to avoid calling a lie a lie.

TT
CM Para 50 onwards - all allegations other than ? lie at both Rs. He's the CEO and painting in brushstrokes and he installed Sinha that impacted . Para 57-8: J I'm just checking list of issues CM All except Gx is at both Rs doors.
CM We dont understand what MLF suggests that as AD not acting at personal, he's not responsible. There has to be ostensible authority throughout. Re the protected act: y'll see the Cx saying best to view as harassment, and say the breadth od test, is also related to a PC

There's a crumpled up piece of paper on the floor under the desk by CM's feet and it's annoying me.

Or worse it's an abandoned tissue

TT
WAs enough in NHSE to conclude there was a protected act - belief in one is sufficient. She said they had substandard treatment as were T identifying - see Cass and PSIR. I dont know how he can say spiking wasnt accurate by NHSE

CM A responsible CEO wld want to find out the facts but he did nothing until July suggesting he didnt see them as serious. Para 101: MLF says [reads re ToR] but ToR say he did. Para 102: the R lapsed into tautology re proper motivation - we say was no personal animosity betwn DSH and C

TT
The bastard or incompetence defence of Anya must be demonstarted. DA gave her an interrogation. Re dishonesty: Miss Durrant finds dishonesty by DA. Re concerns by other professionals - dishonesty was only part of it. Was a chilling effect by Ix yet it continued

(sorry can anyone explain that TT post to me please?)

TT
CM Wrong to sat AD didnt know the extent of conduct of DA as so many emails. R2 accepted he had many Qs re report yet sent it to GMC etc. AD didnt step aside and had DSH in mind as still emailing NHSE. Para 130 onwards suggests the C resurrected matters but was DSHs actions in Aug 23 that didi it

Nope!!

What is a bastard defence? This is a defence which sets out that the employee was not discriminated against. No one was singled out and all employees are treated just as badly in the particular place of work by the person complained about. This defence will often be put forward in a discrimination cases.

TT
AD was also at the mtg w MP. Para 132 is wrong: AD accepted the position re PBs and CSH was they cldnt be prescribed to under 18s. More broadly - para 143 - AD cldnt explain why greater caution being talked about the ICB was expanding. Why no action when prescription happening for under 18s

Para 144: he says DA report isnt waiting to come back. How dod we know. Its gone to NHSE, GMC and prob WBM with no qualifiers.. it sits in the ether. Failure to call Sinha wasnt just about his recruitment. Para 153 onwards - the C wldnt have wanted to be on the board as DSH there - wld be tail wagging the dog

Thanks @rebax

(Assume this next sentence is still CM speaking as AD isn't there but TT doesn't say)

TT

AD cld have been asked what was learned from the report - instead they shrugged their shoulders. Conduct didnt have to relate to C directly to be chilling. Para 161 - AD may not have a central hand re writing but was to its creation.

CM The R states in oral that our facts are in an inaccurate form - there are 12 matters that unlock this case. At all times the C held 2 PCs - GC and EBM that closely relate. The GI belief likely held by R is also protected. Her referrals onwards manifested her beliefs. These were unobjectionable and were WB to the approp regulator

CM making Rs look like sneaky wee shites.