Case 1401349/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Mr Green (lay representative) — 2020
- Case reference
- 1401349/2019
- Decision date
- 7 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gray Date
- Panel members
- Mrs B Catling, Mr R Spry-Shute
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal unanimously found that Singletons Transport Ltd contravened section 39(2)(c) of the Equality Act 2010. It held that the respondent dismissed Miss O Naylor because of pregnancy and maternity, so the pregnancy and maternity discrimination claim succeeded.
At remedy, the tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £11,559.24 in total. That sum comprised £6,000 for injury to feelings, £4,997.03 for loss of earnings for 13.5 weeks at £370.15 per week, and interest of £396.92 on the injury to feelings award plus £165.29 on the loss of earnings element. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, and no written reasons were provided in the written record.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The tribunal found the respondent had contravened section 39(2)(c) Equality Act 2010 by dismissing the claimant because of pregnancy and maternity. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | £11,559 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £11,559
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £4,997
- compensatory remedy recorded
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.