Case 2412215/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Fish v Helping Hands Property Service Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2412215/2023
- Decision date
- 10 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ainscough Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss J Fish
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss J Fish worked as an administrator for Helping Hands Property Service Ltd from 21 July 2021 until 14 November 2023. The tribunal proceeded under Rule 21 because the respondent had not presented a response, and on the information before the judge it found that the claimant had been unfairly dismissed and had been subjected to pregnancy and maternity discrimination.
On the unfair dismissal claim, the tribunal recorded that the claimant was 28 years old and had completed two years' service when her employment ended. Using section 119 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, it awarded a basic award of £937.80 based on one week's pay for each complete year worked after age 22, with weekly pay of £468.90. It then assessed compensation under section 123 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, found that the claimant would not be able to return to work until 1 October 2026, and calculated a net loss exceeding the statutory cap; the compensatory award was therefore limited to her gross annual pay of £13,384.88.
On the pregnancy and maternity discrimination claim, the tribunal found that the claimant had been subjected to unfavourable treatment because of pregnancy. It awarded £12,000 for injury to feelings in the middle Vento band and £662.79 interest on that award. The tribunal also stated that the dismissal itself was not discriminatory because it occurred after the end of the protected period.
The judgment applied the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefit) Regulations 1996 to the unfair dismissal award. The tribunal identified a prescribed element of £5,406 for the period 14 November 2023 to 23 July 2024, and stated that the total monetary award was £26,985.47, with £21,579.47 payable to the claimant pending recoupment of benefits.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed. The basic award was assessed at £937.80 under section 119 ERA 1996, and the compensatory award at £13,384.88 under section 123 ERA 1996, being capped by the claimant's gross annual pay. The award is subject to recoupment, with a prescribed element of £5,406. | Upheld | — | £14,323 |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The tribunal found pregnancy and maternity discrimination and awarded £12,000 for injury to feelings plus £662.79 interest. It also stated that the dismissal itself was not discriminatory because it occurred after the end of the protected period. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | £12,663 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £26,985
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £938
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £13,385
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
5 references- section 119 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 123 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 124 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Vento v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police (No 2)
- Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefit) Regulations 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.