Case 1600113/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Lorna Hughes v Dr Huw Perry and 4 others — 2025
- Case reference
- 1600113/2025
- Decision date
- 8 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Grubb REPRESENTATION
Parties
6 namedClaimant
Ms Lorna Hughes
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs Lorna Hughes's claim was heard at the Employment Tribunal in Cardiff by CVP on 18 September 2025 before Employment Judge Grubb. The respondents did not appear and no defence was filed.
The tribunal found that the complaints of detriment relating to pregnancy and discrimination in relation to maternity were well-founded and succeeded. The judgment records those complaints as successful without providing further written reasons in the extracted text.
On remedy, the tribunal awarded £17,575 for injury to feelings, a 25% uplift of £4,393.75 for failure to comply with the ACAS Code of Practice Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures 2015 under s 207A of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, and £1,090.13 interest on the injury to feelings award from 9 December 2024 to the date of hearing. It also awarded £1,105.28 for failure to update the claimant's terms and conditions under s. 38 of the Employment Act 2002, and deducted £2,457.54 for overpayment of wages, producing a net award of £21,706.63 less tax and national insurance.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The tribunal said the complaints of detriment relating to pregnancy and discrimination in relation to maternity were well-founded and succeeded. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £21,707
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £5,499
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
3 references- ACAS Code of Practice Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures 2015
- s 207A Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- s. 38 Employment Act 2002
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.