Ms J Liew v Aurelius Investments Limited — 2024

The Tribunal, comprising Employment Judge Joffe with lay members Mr P Madelin and Mr P de Chaumont Rambert, heard the claimant's complaints over multiple days in June and August 2024. The claimant brought complaints of direct sex discrimination, harassment related to sex, breach of a sex equality clause (equal pay) and breach of contract in respect of an unpaid bonus. The indirect equal pay element was withdrawn by the claimant during proceedings after consultation with her lay representative.

The Tribunal dismissed all of the discrimination, harassment and remaining equal pay complaints as not well-founded. On the direct equal pay claim regarding the pay rise differential with the named comparator Mr Anthony Tan, the Tribunal accepted that the genuine reason for the salary difference was performance, which it found to be a material factor that was significant and relevant; it noted clear evidence that Mr Tan's performance had been exceptional while the claimant's had been below the expected standard.

The Tribunal upheld the breach of contract claim in respect of bonus. It construed the bonus clause as giving the claimant a contractual entitlement to a pro rata bonus on early termination, subject to a rational exercise of discretion. Assessing performance for the expired part of the bonus year at approximately 80% of £30,000, it arrived at £14,307.69 (calculated on gross pay) and ordered the respondent to pay that sum as damages. Time limit issues did not need to be determined as no discrimination claim was made out.