Case 2303869/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Z Cornwell v Intimates Lingerie LLP — 2019
- Case reference
- 2303869/2018
- Decision date
- 7 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge B Hodgson
- Panel members
- Mr J Flynn, Ms B Hillon
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Z Cornwell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs Z Cornwell brought a claim against Intimates Lingerie LLP for pregnancy discrimination under section 18 of the Equality Act 2010. The tribunal, sitting at Manchester before Employment Judge B Hodgson with Mr J Flynn and Ms B Hillon, gave a unanimous judgment that the claim was well-founded and succeeded.
The judgment records that the respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £11,000 by way of compensation, and that this was an agreed sum. No further breakdown of the award is given in the judgment extract.
The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in accordance with the tribunal rules. The attached interest notice states the relevant decision day as 7 November 2019 and explains that statutory interest would apply if the award were not paid within 14 days, but no separate interest sum is recorded in the judgment itself.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The tribunal held the pregnancy discrimination claim under section 18 Equality Act 2010 was well-founded and succeeded. The judgment records an agreed compensation figure of £11,000 and does not break the award down further. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | £11,000 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £11,000
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £11,000
- 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.
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.