Case 2403146/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs N C Taylor v Mr David Howe t/a Sprint Electrical — 2024
- Case reference
- 2403146/2023
- Decision date
- 1 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ainscough Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs N C Taylor
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not present a response, so the judgment was made on the information before the judge under Rule 21. The claimant worked as an electrician for the respondent from July 2017 to 31 December 2022. The tribunal found that on 7 November 2022 she was treated unfavourably because of her pregnancy, and that on 14 November 2022 her employment was terminated because of her pregnancy. The claim under section 18 Equality Act 2010 succeeded, and the tribunal awarded £12,000 for injury to feelings plus £791.67 interest.
The tribunal also made an unfair dismissal award. It found that the claimant was 28 years old and had completed six years' service when her employment ended, and under section 119 Employment Rights Act 1996 it awarded a basic award of £2,884.56. It also awarded net loss of wages of £3,834.18 for 31 December 2022 to 3 September 2024, £500 for loss of statutory rights, a 10% uplift of £433.41 for failure to follow the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures 2015, and £157.27 interest. The reasons set out the loss periods, including unemployment, later work as an administrator, maternity leave, and later periods when there was no further loss.
Separate successful claims were made for unlawful deduction from wages, with £6,249.99 gross for unpaid wages from October to December 2023; for unpaid pension contributions from 2017 to 2023, with £1,876.38 awarded under the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994; for holiday pay on termination, with £192.30 gross under regulation 14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998; and for failure to provide written particulars of employment, with £1,923.04 under section 38 Employment Act 2002. On the figures stated, the total award is £30,842.80.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The tribunal awarded £12,000 for injury to feelings and £791.67 in interest. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | £12,792 |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment awarded £3,834.18 net loss of wages, £500 for loss of statutory rights, £433.41 as a 10% ACAS uplift, £157.27 interest, and a £2,884.56 basic award. The reasons refer to a £4,767.60 subtotal for the first three elements, although the itemised figures sum to £4,767.59. | Upheld | — | £7,809 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Gross award for unpaid wages from October 2023 to December 2023. | Upheld | — | £6,250 |
| Breach of contract | Award for non-payment of pension contributions from 2017 to 2023 under the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994. | Upheld | — | £1,876 |
| Holiday pay | Gross award for holiday pay on termination under regulation 14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998. | Upheld | — | £192 |
| Other | Award under section 38 Employment Act 2002 for failure to provide written particulars of employment under section 1 Employment Rights Act 1996. | Upheld | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £30,843
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £2,885
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £4,768
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
9 references- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- section 18 Equality Act 2010
- section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994
- regulation 14 Working Time Regulations 1998
- section 1 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 38 Employment Act 2002
- section 119 Employment Rights Act 1996
- ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures 2015
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.