Case 1401353/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Yasmin Moore v Aqura Cleaning Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 1401353/2023
- Decision date
- 1 November 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M. Salter Representation
- Venue
- Exeter
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Yasmin Moore
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the Exeter hearing before Employment Judge M. Salter, sitting alone, the tribunal found that Yasmin Moore had been unfairly and wrongfully dismissed and that her dismissal was an act of pregnancy and maternity discrimination. The respondent did not attend and was not represented.
The written judgment then set out the monetary awards. The tribunal ordered a £300 basic award for unfair dismissal and £650 damages for wrongful dismissal, described in the judgment as damages for breach of contract. It also awarded £690 for 23 days of accrued but untaken holiday at £30 per day.
For the discrimination claim, the tribunal awarded £6,000 for injury to feelings plus £372.16 interest, and £7,800 for financial losses described as 12 months maternity pay plus £242.76 interest. The total award recorded in the judgment was £16,054.92.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | Damages for breach of contract of £650. | Upheld | — | £650 |
| Holiday pay | 23 days accrued but untaken holiday at £30 a day. | Upheld | — | £690 |
| Unfair dismissal | Basic award of £300. | Upheld | — | £300 |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Dismissal held to be an act of pregnancy and maternity discrimination. Award comprised £6,000 for injury to feelings, £372.16 interest, £7,800 for financial losses described as 12 months maternity pay, and £242.76 interest. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | £14,415 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £16,055
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £300
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £7,800
- 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.