Case 2418479/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Z Quinn v Broadbent Assist Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2418479/2020
- Decision date
- 3 February 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mark Butler
- Venue
- Manchester
- Panel members
- Mr J Flynn, Mr P Stowe
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Z Quinn
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal unanimously found that Ms Z Quinn was unfairly dismissed by Broadbent Assist Ltd. Compensation was limited to a four-week period from her effective date of dismissal. The tribunal awarded £500 for loss of statutory rights and a net compensatory award of £1,569.92, calculated as four weeks at the net weekly income of £392.48.
The tribunal also dismissed the claimant’s claims of direct sex discrimination, direct associative disability discrimination, and victimisation as not well founded. The written record states that the tribunal gave its reasons orally at the hearing, and the judgment records no further written reasoning in the extract provided.
The total award was £2,069.92.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed. Compensation was limited to a four-week period from the effective date of dismissal. The award comprised £500 for loss of statutory rights and £1,569.92 net compensatory award, totalling £2,069.92. | Upheld | — | £2,070 |
| Sex discrimination | The claim of direct sex discrimination was found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Disability discrimination | The claim described in the judgment as direct associative disability discrimination was found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | The victimisation claim was found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,070
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £1,570
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.