Case 2404408/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Williams v Mersey Care NHS Foundation Trust — 2024
- Case reference
- 2404408/2023
- Decision date
- 3 May 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Horne
- Venue
- Liverpool
- Panel members
- Mr A Clarke, Ms P Owen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs L Williams
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at Liverpool over five days in February and April 2024, considered complaints by Mrs L Williams against Mersey Care NHS Foundation Trust arising from her maternity-related treatment. The unanimous judgment upheld one aspect of the maternity discrimination complaint: that the respondent had failed to consult or communicate with the claimant regarding the change of her base from Edge Lane to Prescot. The tribunal declared this complaint well-founded but did not determine jurisdiction over the remainder of the claim.
All other complaints were dismissed. The tribunal found that, save for the matter declared well-founded, the respondent did not discriminate against the claimant because of maternity, pregnancy or sex, and did not harass her. The tribunal also found the claimant was not constructively dismissed, with the result that her complaints of unfair dismissal and discriminatory dismissal were not well-founded.
As a remedy for the unlawful discrimination found in respect of the failure to consult about the change of base, the respondent was ordered to pay the claimant damages of £4,000, together with interest of £541, making a total award of £4,541. Written reasons for paragraphs 1 to 8 of the judgment were requested and will follow; reasons for the remedy were given orally at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Upheld only in respect of the respondent's failure to consult or communicate with the claimant regarding the change of base from Edge Lane to Prescot. The remainder of the maternity discrimination complaint was dismissed. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | £4,000 |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Complaint of discrimination because of pregnancy was not well-founded. | Dismissed | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Sex discrimination | The respondent did not discriminate against the claimant because of sex. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Harassment | The tribunal found the respondent did not harass the claimant. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Constructive dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was not constructively dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Complaint of unfair dismissal was not well-founded, the tribunal having found no constructive dismissal. |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,541
- across all upheld claims
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.