Case 1402703/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss AL Mountjoy v Bowerhouse Bath Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 1402703/2019
- Decision date
- 24 November 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Livesey
- Panel members
- Ms J Cusack, Mrs L Eden
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss AL Mountjoy
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the Claimant's claims of discrimination on the grounds of pregnancy and maternity and unfair dismissal at Bristol by video on 10 and 11 November 2020. The tribunal panel comprised Employment Judge Livesey, Ms J Cusack and Mrs L Eden. The Claimant appeared in person and the Respondent was represented by counsel.
The written judgment states only the outcome of the case: both the pregnancy and maternity discrimination complaints and the unfair dismissal complaint were dismissed. The record notes that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing.
No written reasons were provided in the extracted judgment text, and no compensation or other monetary award is recorded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The judgment records that the Claimant's complaints of discrimination on the grounds of pregnancy and maternity were dismissed. Reasons were given orally at the hearing and no written reasons were provided in the extracted text. | Dismissed | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment records that the unfair dismissal complaint was dismissed. Reasons were given orally at the hearing and no written reasons were provided in the extracted text. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.