Ms Y Takehana v Querida Coffee Company Limited — 2019

The claimant started work at the respondent's coffee shop on 28 April 2019. The tribunal found she was not given a written contract, although she later received a letter confirming employment. The parties agreed that she was owed accrued but untaken holiday pay of £465.64, and the tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to provide section 1 employment particulars. Applying section 38 of the Employment Act 2002, it awarded the higher four weeks' pay of £899.28, taking the total award to £1,364.92.

On notice and dismissal, the tribunal found that the claimant had one week's statutory notice, had given notice that she was resigning by 7 August 2019 at the latest, and then worked the period of notice she had given, less a day, at her own request. It accepted Ms Reginaldo's evidence that the WhatsApp exchanges and the later meeting led her reasonably to understand that the claimant was leaving employment in September 2019. The tribunal did not accept that the respondent told the claimant she had to resign in order to obtain government money, and it found there had been no dismissal.

The claim under section 47C ERA 1996 and regulation 19 of the Maternity and Parental Leave etc Regulations 1999 failed because the claimant had not provided the regulation 4 information needed to qualify for maternity leave before she left employment. The tribunal found she had not told the respondent her expected week of childbirth or the date she intended ordinary maternity leave to start, and had not actually asked to take maternity leave. The pregnancy discrimination claim under section 18 of the Equality Act 2010 also failed for the same factual reasons: the tribunal found the alleged instruction to resign did not occur, Ms Reginaldo understood the claimant was resigning, and there was no dismissal on the grounds of pregnancy.