Case 1804651/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss G Masters v Margaret Ellis T/A Hollins Day Care — 2020
- Case reference
- 1804651/2019
- Decision date
- 16 September 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shepherd Members
- Venue
- Leeds
- Panel members
- Mr M Brewer, Mr Q Shah
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss G Masters
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss G Masters brought claims against Margaret Ellis T/A Hollins Day Care that were heard at Leeds on 8 and 9 September 2020 before Employment Judge Shepherd and members Mr M Brewer and Mr Q Shah. The tribunal recorded that the judgment was unanimous.
The tribunal dismissed the claim of unfair dismissal on pregnancy or maternity related grounds. It also dismissed the claims of sex discrimination and pregnancy or maternity discrimination, and dismissed the claim under the Fixed-Term Employees (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2002. No monetary remedy was awarded because all claims failed.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The unfair dismissal claim was pleaded as being on pregnancy or maternity related grounds. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | Sex discrimination claim. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Pregnancy or maternity discrimination claim. | Dismissed | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Fixed-term employee regulations | Claim under the Fixed-Term Employees (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2002. | 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.