Associate specialist surgeon resigned after accessing ex-wife's medical records: tribunal upholds employer's process
A Cardiff tribunal dismissed claims of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination by a surgeon who accessed his ex-wife's medical records without consent over 13 years. The tribunal found he resigned voluntarily and the employer's disciplinary process was fair.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant accessed his ex-wife's medical records without consent on numerous occasions between 2006 and 2019.
- The claimant admitted accessing the records but denied misconduct, claiming he had consent or was acting as a treating doctor.
- The respondent placed the claimant on the Extended UPSW procedure, which the claimant did not appeal.
- The claimant applied for ill health retirement in December 2020 and resigned in June 2021.
- The tribunal found the claimant was not dismissed but resigned voluntarily.
- The tribunal found no causal link between the claimant's OCD/OCPD and his conduct in accessing medical records.
Timeline
-
Ex-wife's complaint
The claimant's ex-wife complained that he had accessed her medical records without consent.
-
Claimant informed of investigation
The claimant met with Professor Walker and admitted accessing his ex-wife's records. He was told an investigation would begin under UPSW.
-
First investigation meeting
The claimant met with Professor Hope-Gill and provided a statement explaining his actions, citing obsessive compulsive traits.
-
Suicide attempt
The claimant attempted self-harm after a difficult court hearing in spousal maintenance proceedings.
-
Decision to proceed under Extended UPSW
Mr Scott-Coombes decided the matter should proceed under the Extended Procedure; the claimant's request for an independent psychiatrist was refused.
-
Inquiry Panel hearing
The Inquiry Panel heard evidence and found the claimant's explanations disingenuous; they rejected the link between OCPD and the conduct.
-
Inquiry Panel part 2 report
The panel recommended that a disciplinary hearing consider dismissal as a possible sanction.
-
Claimant decides to take ill health retirement
The claimant told Mr Gidman he wanted to leave via ill health retirement and would not return to work.
-
Disciplinary Panel hearing
The Disciplinary Panel issued a final written warning, taking into account mitigation but not the claimant's health as a mitigating factor.
-
Claimant resigns
The claimant agreed to resign and retire on ill health grounds; his employment ended on this date.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the surgeon was unfairly dismissed (actually or constructively) and whether the employer discriminated against him due to disability, including by failing to make reasonable adjustments and harassment.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims. It found that the surgeon resigned voluntarily after applying for ill health retirement, so there was no dismissal. The disciplinary process was fair, and the final written warning was a proportionate response to the misconduct.
Key reasons:
- The surgeon accessed his ex-wife's medical records without consent on numerous occasions over 13 years.
- The employer followed its UPSW procedure, which the surgeon did not appeal.
- The surgeon's OCD/OCPD did not cause the misconduct, so there was no discrimination arising from disability.
- The employer made reasonable adjustments during the hearing.
No compensation was awarded as the claims failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employees who voluntarily resign cannot bring unfair dismissal claims unless they can show constructive dismissal, which requires a fundamental breach of contract by the employer.
- Employers who follow their own disciplinary procedures and give employees a fair opportunity to respond are likely to be seen as acting reasonably.
- A disability must be causally linked to the misconduct for a discrimination claim to succeed; simply having a condition is not enough.
- Accessing someone's medical records without consent is a serious breach of trust and confidentiality, even if the person is a family member.
A long-running data breach and its consequences
This case involved a consultant cardio-thoracic surgeon who, over a 13-year period, repeatedly accessed his ex-wife's medical records without her consent. When the health board discovered this through a complaint, it launched a formal investigation under its UPSW procedure. The surgeon admitted the access but argued he had consent or was acting as a treating doctor—explanations the tribunal found disingenuous.
The surgeon had a history of obsessive-compulsive traits and was diagnosed with OCD and OCPD. He argued that his condition caused him to access the records and that the employer should have treated him more leniently as a disabled person. However, the tribunal found no causal link between his condition and the misconduct, noting that the accessing was deliberate and repeated over many years.
What the employer did right
The health board followed a structured disciplinary process, including an investigation, an inquiry panel, and a disciplinary hearing. The surgeon was given opportunities to respond and was represented. The board also made reasonable adjustments during the tribunal hearing itself, such as regular breaks and allowing extra time for responses. The final outcome was a final written warning, not dismissal—the surgeon chose to resign and apply for ill health retirement before the warning was even issued.
Why the claims failed
The tribunal found that the surgeon was not dismissed; he resigned voluntarily. There was no constructive dismissal because the employer had not breached the implied term of trust and confidence. The disability discrimination claims failed because the misconduct was not a consequence of his disability, and the employer had made reasonable adjustments. The case illustrates that even serious misconduct can be handled fairly if the employer follows proper procedure, and that employees who choose to leave cannot later claim they were forced out without evidence of a fundamental breach.
Similar cases
Ignorance of time limits not enough for unfair dismissal but disability claim allowed
A former employee who missed the deadline for his unfair dismissal claim because he didn't know about the three-month limit was able to proceed with his disability discrimination claim on 'just and equitable' grounds.
22-year NHS employee's unfair dismissal claim fails after being brought four months late
A Medical Laboratory Assistant with 22 years' service had his unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims dismissed by an employment tribunal because they were presented about four months after the legal deadline, despite his serious health issues.
Dismissed for database searches: menopause symptoms not a disability, tribunal rules
An administrative officer with 18 years' service was dismissed for gross misconduct after searching her own and her neighbour's addresses on a DWP database. The tribunal upheld the dismissal and found her menopausal symptoms did not amount to a disability.
Cancer diagnosis and ill-health retirement: claim dismissed as too late
A driver specialist with 12 years' service had his unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims thrown out after submitting his claim form four months late, despite having been warned of the time limit.