A nurse is suing her GP brother – claiming he failed to tell her that she had been fired while she was pregnant.
Anika Moughal alleges her brother was ‘ambiguous’ when he tried to inform her she was sacked, an employment tribunal heard.
Dr Mohammed Moughal wanted to ‘soften the blow’ when he fired his sister, but he did so to the extent that she didn’t know she’d been sacked.
The family doctor suggested his sister ‘stop logging in’ instead of using clear language that she had been ‘dismissed’ or ‘terminated’, it was heard.
She is now taking him and his GP practice, in Scotland, to an employment tribunal for claims including unfair dismissal.
At a preliminary hearing, an employment judge said ‘words used were equally consistent with a temporary crisis during a partnership dispute’ as opposed to ‘communication of a dismissal’ and gave the nurse the green light to continue her claim.
The Glasgow hearing was told Miss Moughal worked for Greenlaw Medical Practice as a practice nurse from September 2020.
Her brother Dr Moughal was one of the partners running Greenlaw, a partnership which ran GP practices in Newton Mearns, East Renfrewshire, and Pollokshields in Glasgow.
Dr Mohammed Moughal wanted to ‘soften the blow’ when he fired his sister Anika Moughal, pictured, but he did so to the extent that she didn’t know she’d been sacked
Dr Moughal (pictured) advised his nurse sister to ‘stop working and to stop logging in’ but did not use words such as ‘terminated’, ‘dismissed’, ‘fired’ or similar, the tribunal heard
Miss Moughal had previously been employed at Greenlaw as a receptionist in 2013, and worked as a health care support worker there between 2014 and 2018 while she studied to be a nurse.
Miss Moughal had a break in summer 2020 to get married.
She came back to the practice to work as a nurse, largely working remotely and managing patients with chronic diseases.
On occasion, she would go to the GP practice to carry out Covid-19 vaccination clinics or smear clinics.
Miss Moughal fell pregnant in 2023 and had a ‘complicated’ pregnancy.
The practice manager Sandra Grant therefore asked her to carry out in-person clinics much less often.
The tribunal heard that the decision was then made to sack her, though details about why have not yet been aired.
The tribunal heard that Greenlaw’s partners had agreed that Miss Moughal should be ‘off payroll from 1 May 2024’, but the judge queried: ‘What was communicated to the claimant?’
The GP accepted in cross-examination that he might not have communicated what he had intended to Miss Moughal, namely that her employment ‘was coming to an end’
Employment Judge Mark Whitcombe said the relevant conversation took place betwen the two siblings at the end of April 2024.
Dr Moughal, he said ‘wished to soften the blow not least because he knew that his sister was pregnant, and I find that he used ambiguous language.’
The judge added: ”It was objectively ambiguous, and it also appeared ambiguous to (Miss Moughal).’
The tribunal heard the GP advised his nurse sister to ‘stop working and to stop logging in’ but did not use words such as ‘terminated’, ‘dismissed’, ‘fired’ or similar.
EJ Whitcombed said: ‘He communicated that her work should stop.’
Greenlaw has since dissolved following a dispute between the partners.
The tribunal continued: ‘(Dr Moughal) said to (Miss Moughal) ‘bear with me’ in the context of an ongoing dispute between the partners.
‘He accepted in cross-examination that he might not have communicated what he intended to, i.e. that the employment relationship was coming to an end.
‘He accepted in cross-examination that (Miss Moughal) might have been left with the impression that the situation was not, or not yet, permanent.
‘Importantly, there was no letter or email confirming the termination of (Miss Moughal)’s employment in writing.
‘She did not at that stage know that the payments of salary would be permanently stopped after April 2024.’
The tribunal found that she was sacked on July 31 2024.
EJ Whitcombe said: ‘There was nothing about the context which made it sufficiently clear that the instruction not to log on or work was permanent, and that (Miss Moughal)’s contract was therefore at an end.
‘The words used were equally consistent with a temporary crisis during a partnership dispute, a dispute which might be resolved.
‘I do not think that a reasonable employee in (Miss Moughal)’s position would have understood (Dr Moughal)’s words to amount to the communication of a dismissal in all the circumstances.’
Miss Moughal received a P45 by August of that year, by which point she believed she had been dismissed.
However, the judge said ‘there was nothing which clearly and unambiguously communicated to (Miss Moughal) that the terms of her contract were changing on a permanent basis’.
The judge decided in a preliminary hearing that Miss Moughal was an employee, she was dismissed and the employment tribunal had jurisdiction to hear her claims.
Miss Moughal’s case will be considered in full by an employment tribunal at a later date.
NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde Health Board is potentially liable for any successful claims, the judgment on the preliminary issues said.
