Case 2411191/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Waddington v Lifestyle Holidays Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2411191/2019
- Decision date
- 9 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dunlop
- Venue
- Manchester
- Panel members
- Mr M Smith, M C Cunningham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Waddington
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss S Waddington brought claims of automatically unfair dismissal, pregnancy discrimination, detriment because of pregnancy, and breach of contract (notice pay) against Lifestyle Holidays Ltd. The tribunal dismissed the automatically unfair dismissal claim under s.99 Employment Rights Act 1996 and Reg 19 of the Maternity and Parental Leave Etc Regulations 1999. It also dismissed the claim that the dismissal itself was an act of pregnancy discrimination under s.18 Equality Act 2010.
The tribunal found, however, that a comment made by Mark Dixon on or around 16 June 2019, to the effect that the claimant would be better off returning to the UK, was pregnancy discrimination and a detriment because of pregnancy. That claim succeeded to that extent under s.18 Equality Act 2010, s.47C Employment Rights Act 1996, and Reg 19 of the 1999 Regulations.
The remaining pregnancy discrimination and detriment allegations were dismissed. The notice pay claim was withdrawn. The tribunal ordered Lifestyle Holidays Ltd to pay £1,750 as damages for injury to feelings.
Claims and outcomes
5 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Automatically unfair dismissal under s.99 Employment Rights Act 1996 and Reg 19 of the Maternity and Parental Leave Etc Regulations 1999. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Claim that the dismissal itself was an act of pregnancy discrimination under s.18 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The tribunal found that Mark Dixon's comment on or around 16 June 2019, to the effect that the claimant would be better off returning to the UK, was pregnancy discrimination and a detriment because of pregnancy under s.18 Equality Act 2010, s.47C Employment Rights Act 1996, and Reg 19 of the Maternity and Parental Leave Etc Regulations 1999. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | £1,750 |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Remaining pregnancy discrimination and detriment because of pregnancy allegations were dismissed. | Dismissed | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Breach of contract | Notice pay claim was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,750
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
4 references- s.99 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.18 Equality Act 2010
- s.47C Employment Rights Act 1996
- Reg 19 Maternity and Parental Leave Etc Regulations 1999
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.