Case 2209286/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms T Ashreena v Cabinet Office — 2024
- Case reference
- 2209286/2023
- Decision date
- 14 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Adkin
- Venue
- London Central
- Panel members
- Mr S Pearlman, Mr S Godecharle
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms T Ashreena
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case at London Central Employment Tribunal in private by video on 5, 6, 7 and 10 June 2024. The claimant represented herself and the respondent was represented by counsel.
The judgment records that the claimant's complaints of maternity detriment, maternity dismissal, direct disability discrimination, indirect disability discrimination, direct sex discrimination and indirect sex discrimination were not well-founded and were dismissed. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, with the parties informed that they could apply for written reasons within 14 days of the order being sent.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Complaint described as Maternity Detriment under s.47C Employment Rights Act 1996 and reg 19 Maternity and Parental Leave etc Regulations 1999; judgment states it was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Complaint described as Maternity Dismissal under s.99 Employment Rights Act 1996 and reg 20 Maternity and Parental Leave etc Regulations 1999; judgment states it was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination under Equality Act 2010 section 13 was not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Indirect disability discrimination under Equality Act 2010 section 19 was not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Sex discrimination | Direct sex discrimination under Equality Act 2010 section 13 was not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Sex discrimination | Indirect sex discrimination under Equality Act 2010 section 19 was not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed |
Legal tests applied
6 references- s.47C Employment Rights Act 1996
- reg 19 Maternity and Parental Leave etc Regulations 1999
- s.99 Employment Rights Act 1996
- reg 20 Maternity and Parental Leave etc Regulations 1999
- Equality Act 2010 section 13
- Equality Act 2010 section 19
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.