Case 2304594/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Ms J ANDREW v WONGA GROUP Ltd (In Administration) — 2019
- Case reference
- 2304594/2018
- Decision date
- 18 September 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hargrove
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms J ANDREW
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent failed to file a response in time or at all, and the judgment records that the administrators had consented to the continuation of the proceedings. On that basis, under rule 21, Employment Judge Hargrove adjudged the listed claims to be well founded.
The tribunal upheld a claim for a protective award under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour (Consolidation) Act 1992, finding that the respondent had failed to comply with the section 188 consultation requirements. It also upheld a claim that the claimant's dismissal was an act of direct discrimination contrary to section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 on grounds of pregnancy or maternity.
The tribunal further upheld claims for breach of contract in respect of notice pay and for unlawful deductions from wages in respect of maternity pay and holiday pay. No remedy amounts are recorded in this judgment because the decision directed that a separate remedies hearing would be listed, to be combined with Carter v Wonga Group Ltd 2304597/2018.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award under section 189 TULRCA 1992 for failure to comply with section 188 consultation requirements. | Upheld | — | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Dismissal found to be an act of direct discrimination contrary to section 13 Equality Act 2010 on grounds of pregnancy or maternity. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract in respect of notice pay. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unlawful deductions from wages in respect of maternity pay and holiday pay, stated in the judgment as contrary to section 13 of the Employment Rights Act. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- rule 21
- section 189 TULRCA 1992
- section 188 TULRCA 1992
- section 13 Equality Act 2010
- section 13 Employment Rights Act
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.