Case 1805406/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Y Whitwam v Cura Terrae Ltd (First Respondent) Miss S Blannin (Second Respondent) Mr. P Skipworth (Third Respondent) — 2023
- Case reference
- 1805406/2022
- Decision date
- 7 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ayre
- Venue
- Sheffield
- Panel members
- Mr. W Roberts, Mr. M Taj
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Y Whitwam
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal unanimously found that the First Respondent breached section 80G of the Employment Rights Act 1996 in the way it dealt with the claimant's flexible working request, because it did not deal with the request in a reasonable manner. It awarded the claimant £3,426 under section 80I for that breach.
The claimant's detriment claim under section 47E of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and her automatic unfair dismissal claim under section 104C both failed and were dismissed. The direct sex discrimination claim also failed, as did the claim that the respondent failed to make reasonable adjustments, and the unlawful deduction from wages claim.
The tribunal upheld the indirect sex discrimination claim, finding that the First and Third Respondents indirectly discriminated against the claimant by applying a PCP of refusing flexible working requests to work from home. It awarded £7,500 for injury to feelings and £578.63 interest on that award, making a total award of £11,504.63.
Claims and outcomes
7 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The unlawful deduction from wages claim failed and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Flexible working | The tribunal found that the First Respondent breached section 80G of the Employment Rights Act 1996 because it did not deal with the claimant's flexible working request in a reasonable manner. Compensation of £3,426 was awarded under section 80I. | Upheld | — | £3,426 |
| Whistleblowing | The claim for detriment contrary to section 47E of the Employment Rights Act 1996 failed and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The automatic unfair dismissal claim contrary to section 104C of the Employment Rights Act 1996 failed and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | The direct sex discrimination claim failed and was dismissed. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Sex discrimination | The tribunal upheld the indirect sex discrimination claim, finding that the First and Third Respondents indirectly discriminated against the claimant by applying a PCP of refusing flexible working requests to work from home. The award comprised £7,500 for injury to feelings plus £578.63 interest. |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £11,505
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £3,426
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
4 references- section 80G Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 47E Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 104C Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 80I Employment Rights Act 1996
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.