Case 1600632/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v L Marquez v Clear Sky Recruitment Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 1600632/2022
- Decision date
- 1 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge C Sharp
- Venue
- Newport
- Panel members
- Mr M Lewis, Mr C Stephenson OBE
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Newport on 27 and 28 February 2023, the Tribunal, sitting before Employment Judge C Sharp with Mr M Lewis and Mr C Stephenson OBE, dealt with two claims brought by Ms V Laverge Marquez against Clear Sky Recruitment Ltd. The Tribunal gave a unanimous judgment.
The Claimant's claim of unauthorised deduction from wages in relation to holiday pay was recorded as withdrawn and dismissed. The judgment does not record any separate monetary award for that claim.
The Tribunal found the Claimant's pregnancy discrimination claim under s18 Equality Act 2010 well-founded. The Respondent was ordered to pay a total of £1,637.75, made up of £1,500 for injury to feelings and £137.75 interest.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Claim of unauthorised deduction from wages in relation to holiday pay; recorded as withdrawn and dismissed. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Claim under s18 Equality Act 2010 found well-founded. The total award of £1,637.75 comprised £1,500 injury to feelings and £137.75 interest. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | £1,638 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,638
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s18 Equality Act 2010
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.