Case 1602271/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs C Shorney-Jones v Multiple Sclerosis Society — 2024
- Case reference
- 1602271/2023
- Decision date
- 1 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Russell
- Panel members
- Mrs J Kiely, Mr B Roberts
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs C Shorney-Jones
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at Cardiff by video on 24 to 28 June 2024, gave a unanimous oral judgment in Mrs C Shorney-Jones v Multiple Sclerosis Society. It found that four specified allegations of pregnancy and maternity discrimination were well-founded: 1.1.1, 1.1.2, 1.1.3 (formerly 1.1.4) and 1.1.6 (formerly 1.1.7). The remaining pregnancy and maternity discrimination complaints were dismissed.
The tribunal also found victimisation allegation 2.3.5 well-founded and dismissed the remaining victimisation complaints. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested, so no detailed reasoning or remedy figures are included in the text provided.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The tribunal found complaints 1.1.1, 1.1.2, 1.1.3 (formerly 1.1.4) and 1.1.6 (formerly 1.1.7) well-founded. The remaining pregnancy and maternity discrimination complaints were dismissed. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Victimisation | The tribunal found allegation 2.3.5 well-founded. The remaining victimisation complaints were dismissed. | Upheld | — | — |
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.