Case 2301856/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs C Holloway v The Durdans Stables Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2301856/2021
- Decision date
- 25 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Corrigan
- Panel members
- Ms J Forecast, Mr S Goodden
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs C Holloway
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs C Holloway succeeded in her claim for unfair dismissal against The Durdans Stables Ltd. The tribunal found that she had been unfairly dismissed and awarded £4,839.35. That award was broken down into a basic award of £666 and a compensatory award of £4,173.35.
The compensatory award was made up of loss of earnings of £3,663.45, pension contributions of £109.90, and loss of statutory rights of £400. The tribunal recorded that recoupment did not apply to the award.
The tribunal also found a contravention of s120(1) Equality Act 2010 in respect of maternity discrimination. For that claim, it ordered the respondent to pay £12,000, stated to be compensation for injury to feelings only.
The total amount ordered to be paid by the respondent to the claimant was £16,839.35.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed and awarded compensation of £4,839.35, made up of a basic award of £666 and a compensatory award of £4,173.35. | Upheld | — | £4,839 |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The tribunal found a contravention of s120(1) Equality Act 2010 in respect of maternity discrimination and awarded £12,000 for injury to feelings only. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | £12,000 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £16,839
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £666
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £4,173
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 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.