Case 2301215/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms A E Geronimo Flores v KTV Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2301215/2023
- Decision date
- 7 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Liz Ord
- Venue
- Croydon
- Panel members
- Elizabeth Whitlam, Mike Cann
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms A E Geronimo Flores
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Ms Flores was in the Respondent’s employment for the purposes of s83 Equality Act 2010 and was a worker for the purposes of s230 Employment Rights Act 1996, but was not an agency worker under the Agency Workers Regulations 2010. Her claim for maternity suspension pay was not well-founded and was dismissed.
The Claimant’s pregnancy discrimination complaint was held to be in time because there was conduct extending over a period, with the last act or omission within three months of her notifying ACAS. The complaint succeeded only on four matters: failure to undertake an adequate risk assessment, failure to make reasonable adjustments, delay in replying to her questions about SMP, and telling her to stop coming to work on 4 October 2022.
The complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages in respect of holiday pay was postponed, so the written record does not record a final determination on that claim. The judgment text provided does not set out any monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Claim for maternity suspension pay was found not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Complaint was in time because there was conduct extending over a period, and it succeeded only on the allegations of failing to undertake an adequate risk assessment, failing to make reasonable adjustments, delaying replies about SMP, and telling the Claimant to stop coming to work on 4 October 2022. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages (holiday pay) was postponed and not finally determined in this judgment. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- s83 Equality Act 2010
- s230 Employment Rights Act 1996
- conduct extending over a period
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.