Case 2201543/2020 · Employment Tribunal

Ms M Smietanka v Meatailer Limited — 2021

Case reference: 2201543/2020
Decision date: 10 December 2021
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Heath
Panel members: Mr R Baber, Mr M Ferry

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Ms M Smietanka

Respondent

Meatailer Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

Ms M Smietanka worked at the respondent's Covent Garden restaurant from 5 May 2018 and was promoted to Grill Boss/Second Chef later in 2018. She told Mr Dworczynski she was pregnant on 26 June 2019. The tribunal found that he responded positively, discussed adjustments with her, and that the pregnancy risk assessment carried out on 6 August 2019 reflected the claimant's input, including no double shifts, no early or late finishes, and a working pattern of around 35 hours per week.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Pregnancy and maternity discrimination	The tribunal rejected all pleaded heads of pregnancy and maternity discrimination under section 18 Equality Act 2010 and found no unfavourable treatment because of pregnancy or maternity leave.	Dismissed	Pregnancy and maternity	—
Unlawful deduction from wages	The tribunal held that the complaint was really that the claimant should have been given more hours on a zero-hours contract, which did not amount to an identifiable deduction from wages under section 13 ERA 1996.	Dismissed	—	—

Legal tests applied

10 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.