Case 1305489/2020 · Employment Tribunal
in person For the v Mr M Griffin (director) — 2021
- Case reference
- 1305489/2020
- Decision date
- 12 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Perry
- Venue
- Birmingham
- Panel members
- Mrs BH Astill, Mrs J Keene
Parties
2 namedClaimant
in person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at Birmingham before Employment Judge Perry with Mrs BH Astill and Mrs J Keene, found that Miss C Bridges was discriminated against in contravention of Part 5 Equality Act 2010 and that the discrimination was on the ground of pregnancy/maternity. That claim succeeded.
The claimant's unfair dismissal complaint was also before the tribunal, but it was found not well founded and was dismissed.
The tribunal awarded £5,500 in respect of injury to feelings and £775 interest, making a total award of £6,275. The judgment also records that the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Job Seeker's Allowance and Income Support) Regulations 1996 did not apply.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The tribunal found discrimination contrary to Part 5 Equality Act 2010. The written judgment records an award of £5,500 for injury to feelings plus £775 interest, total £6,275. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | £6,275 |
| Unfair dismissal | The unfair dismissal complaint was found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,275
- across all upheld claims
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.