Case 2402299/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms C Hill v Nashberry Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2402299/2020
- Decision date
- 28 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Howard Members
- Venue
- Manchester
- Panel members
- Ms A Gilchrist, Ms C Doyle
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms C Hill
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs C Hill brought claims against Nashberry Limited for pregnancy and maternity discrimination under s.18 Equality Act 2010 and automatically unfair dismissal for family leave under s.99 Employment Rights Act 1996. The hearing was at Manchester on 16 June 2021 before Employment Judge Howard, sitting with Ms A Gilchrist and Ms C Doyle, with the claimant appearing in person and the respondent represented by its director, Mr D Simon.
The tribunal’s judgment states that both claims failed. It records that the pregnancy and maternity discrimination claim and the automatically unfair dismissal claim were dismissed. No separate monetary award is recorded in the judgment text provided.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Claim brought pursuant to s.18 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Claim pleaded as automatically unfair dismissal for family leave pursuant to s.99 Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.