Case 1805486/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss F Belsham v AAW Holdings Limited: company number 10254921 (sued as Leeds Rebound Gymnastics Club Limited) — 2023
- Case reference
- 1805486/2022
- Decision date
- 20 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brain REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss F Belsham
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Miss F Belsham was disabled for Equality Act purposes throughout her employment with AAW Holdings Limited, because of dyslexia, and that her siblings were also disabled because of autism. It held that her unauthorised deduction from wages complaint and her unfair dismissal complaint brought pursuant to section 103A ERA 1996 were both outside the relevant limitation periods and that it was reasonably practicable for those claims to have been presented in time, so the tribunal had no jurisdiction to consider them.
The Equality Act complaints were also presented out of time under section 123 Equality Act 2010, but the tribunal found it just and equitable to extend time to 5 October 2022 so that it could determine them. It then held that the reasonable adjustments complaint was well-founded: the practice of sending employment documents electronically substantially disadvantaged the claimant by reason of disability, and printing a hard copy of the contract would have been a reasonable adjustment.
The tribunal also upheld the complaint under section 18 Equality Act 2010 about treatment said to arise from pregnancy or pregnancy-related illness, including shouting at the claimant and unjustified reprimands when she was unwell with morning sickness. It upheld the alternative harassment complaint brought on sex grounds, and the harassment complaint relating to the siblings' disabilities.
On remedy, the tribunal found that, but for the prohibited conduct, the claimant would have worked until maternity leave in or around mid-December 2022. It awarded six months' loss of earnings at £1,014 net per month, totalling £6,084, and £11,000 for injury to feelings. It also awarded interest of £121.35 on the loss of earnings and £549.70 on injury to feelings, producing a total award of £17,755.05 payable by 20 January 2023. The tribunal made no award for earnings after mid-December 2022 because it found the claimant would then have been on maternity leave and should be able to mitigate thereafter.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held the unauthorised deduction from wages complaint was presented outside the section 23 ERA 1996 limitation period and that it was reasonably practicable for it to have been presented in time, so it had no jurisdiction to consider it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal recorded this as an unfair dismissal complaint brought pursuant to section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It held the claim was out of time under section 111 ERA 1996 and that it was reasonably practicable to present it within the limitation period. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Reasonable adjustments claim. The tribunal found the claimant was disabled because of dyslexia, that the practice of sending documents electronically substantially disadvantaged her, and that a reasonable adjustment would have been to print a hard copy of the contract for her use. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The tribunal upheld the complaint under section 18 Equality Act 2010 concerning shouting at the claimant and unjustifiably reprimanding her when she was unwell at work because of morning sickness. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Harassment | Alternative complaint to the pregnancy-based complaint, pleaded on the basis of harassment related to sex under section 26 Equality Act 2010. | Upheld |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £17,755
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £6,084
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
5 references- section 23 ERA 1996
- section 111 ERA 1996
- section 123 Equality Act 2010
- reasonably practicable
- just and equitable
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.