Case 1802552/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Hussain v City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council Heard: In Leeds and by CVP — 2023
- Case reference
- 1802552/2022
- Decision date
- 5 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge JM Wade
- Panel members
- Ms S Scott, Mr IW Taylor
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Hussain
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs S Hussain brought a victimisation complaint and complaints under section 18 of the Equality Act 2010 against City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council. The tribunal refused her application to amend or add to the victimisation complaint.
The victimisation complaint was dismissed. The section 18 Equality Act 2010 complaints succeeded, which on this record are pregnancy and maternity discrimination complaints. No further factual reasoning is set out in the extracted text.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £7,513.33 in total. That award was made up of £7,000 for injury to feelings and £513.33 in interest.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Victimisation | The tribunal refused the claimant's application to amend/add to her victimisation complaint, and the victimisation complaint itself was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The judgment states that the claimant's complaints of contraventions of section 18 of the Equality Act 2010 succeeded. The award comprised £7,000 for injury to feelings plus £513.33 interest. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | £7,513 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,513
- across all upheld claims
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.