Dr. Nadeem Crowe Vs Royal Free Hospital

Dr. Nadeem Crowe vs. Royal Free Hospital (Employment Tribunal)

 

The case of Dr. Nadeem Crowe vs. Royal Free London NHS Trust is an ongoing employment tribunal matter stemming from Dr. Crowe's suspension over his social media posts concerning the Israel-Gaza conflict.

Dr. Crowe, an Emergency Medicine doctor who was employed as a contracted ("bank") worker, alleges that the Royal Free Hospital (RFL) suspended him unlawfully in response to his political speech, raising questions about freedom of expression for medical professionals and the employment rights of bank staff within the NHS.

 

Background of the Dispute

 

  • The Suspension: Dr. Crowe (also referred to as Nadeem Haddadin-Crowe in some sources) was suspended from employment by the Medical Director of the RFL NHS Trust on 14 August 2024 during an emergency medicine shift, reportedly without being provided an immediate reason.

  • The Cause: The disciplinary action relates to Dr. Crowe's social media posts regarding the Israel-Gaza conflict, which the hospital allegedly deemed "potentially upsetting" or grounds for suspension. Hospital administrators reportedly accused him of anti-Semitism, potentially based on the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition.

  • Key Employment Issue: A core legal issue in the case is the RFL's own disciplinary policy, which Dr. Crowe argues excludes bank staff. If this is true, it significantly impacts his employment rights and the rights of all bank workers employed by the hospital, as he argues the RFL is attempting to deny him basic employment rights to silence his political views.

 

Legal Status and Claims

 

  • Preliminary Hearing: A preliminary hearing has taken place where the Employment Judge agreed to allow Dr. Crowe to take forward claims of harassment and direct discrimination.

  • Dismissed Claim: A claim of indirect discrimination was not allowed by the judge, primarily due to the lack of a clearly identified policy to make the claim against, as the RFL has not definitively stated which policy was used against him. Dr. Crowe has expressed hope to appeal this decision.

  • Individual Respondent: The Judge also agreed to add Dr. Jane Hawdon, the Responsible Officer, as an individual respondent in the case.

  • Case Significance: Dr. Crowe is pursuing the case not only for himself but to establish a legal basis that clarifies the rights of physicians to express themselves and advocate on political issues without facing employment repercussions from the NHS.

 

Current Status

The court case is currently scheduled for a full hearing in June 2026. Dr. Crowe is actively using this time to raise awareness and funds for his legal costs through platforms like CrowdJustice, arguing the case is a critical fight for free speech within the medical profession.

Support his legal fight HERE