Case 2408002/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Gemma Hughes v Paragon Brands Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2408002/2021
- Decision date
- 21 December 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge G Tobin Members
- Venue
- Manchester
- Panel members
- Ms C Nield, Ms H Sheard
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Gemma Hughes
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the Manchester hearing, the tribunal found for Miss Gemma Hughes on sex discrimination, harassment, victimisation, and unlawful deduction from wages. It recorded that she succeeded in 3 of 5 allegations of direct discrimination on the grounds of sex under s13 Equality Act 2010, and in 1 of 15 harassment allegations on the grounds of sex under s26 Equality Act 2010. The claimant also succeeded in her complaint that her dismissal was an act of victimisation under s27 Equality Act 2010. Two victimisation complaints against a third party were withdrawn.
The tribunal noted that the dismissal-related discrimination complaint was out of time, but extended time as just and equitable under s123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010. On wages, the respondent conceded that it had not paid some wages in breach of s13 Employment Rights Act 1996 and accepted that £1,384.62 gross was owed. The judgment states that remedy had been agreed between the parties and was subject to an ACAS conciliation agreement, so no split tribunal award is recorded in the written judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | The tribunal recorded that the claimant succeeded in 3 of her 5 allegations of direct discrimination on the grounds of sex under s13 Equality Act 2010. It noted that the claimant's dismissal-related discrimination complaint was out of time, but time was extended as just and equitable under s123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010. | Upheld | Sex | — |
| Harassment | The tribunal recorded that the claimant succeeded in 1 of her 15 allegations of harassment on the grounds of sex under s26 Equality Act 2010. | Upheld | Sex | — |
| Victimisation | The tribunal recorded that the claimant withdrew 2 complaints of victimisation against a third party. It also found that her dismissal was an act of victimisation in breach of s27 Equality Act 2010. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The respondent conceded that it had not paid some of the claimant's wages, in breach of s13 Employment Rights Act 1996, and that £1,384.62 gross was owed. The judgment says remedy had been agreed between the parties and was subject to an ACAS conciliation agreement. | Upheld | — | £1,385 |
Legal tests applied
5 references- s13 Equality Act 2010
- s26 Equality Act 2010
- s27 Equality Act 2010
- s123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010
- s13 Employment Rights Act 1996
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.