Case 2403092/2022 · Employment Tribunal

Ms Olivia Steele v Dream Apartments Group Limited — 2023

Case reference: 2403092/2022
Decision date: 28 February 2023
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Ross

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Ms Olivia Steele

Respondent

Dream Apartments Group Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The judgment was entered under Rule 21 because the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. Employment Judge Ross therefore determined the claim on the papers and found for the claimant on all pleaded claims.

Ms Olivia Steele succeeded in her complaint of harassment related to sex under section 26 of the Equality Act 2010. She also succeeded in her complaint of pregnancy-related discrimination under section 18 of the Equality Act 2010.

The tribunal further held that she had been automatically unfairly dismissed for a pregnancy-related reason under section 99 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The case was listed for a remedy hearing to determine compensation, so the judgment did not record any award in this decision.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Harassment	Harassment related to sex succeeded under section 26 Equality Act 2010.	Upheld	Sex	—
Pregnancy and maternity discrimination	Pregnancy-related discrimination succeeded under section 18 Equality Act 2010.	Upheld	Pregnancy and maternity	—
Unfair dismissal	Automatically unfair dismissal from a pregnancy-related reason succeeded under section 99 Employment Rights Act 1996.	Upheld	—	—

Legal tests applied

4 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 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.