Ms Sophie Hall v Fresh Logistics Ltd and 2 others — 2020

The claimant, Ms Sophie Hall, worked for Fresh Logistics Ltd as a compliance administration assistant from 20 March 2017. The tribunal found that performance concerns arose by July 2018, when she was invited to an investigatory meeting by her then manager, Lindsey Watmough, and on 2 August 2018 she received a 6-month written warning for underperformance. The tribunal rejected the claimant's case that those documents and the related disciplinary log were fabricated, and it found that the claimant's later attempt to challenge the authenticity of documents in a side bundle significantly undermined her credibility.

The tribunal accepted that by late November 2018 the claimant was again being performance managed, this time by David Price, following an audit that revealed errors including missing logbooks, missed vehicle checks, misfiled documents and incorrect purchasing. It found that she told Price on 29 November 2018 that she was pregnant and that this was the first time he knew of the pregnancy. Although the claimant had taken time off with abdominal pain in December 2018, the tribunal found no evidential basis for treating that absence, or any earlier symptoms said to arise from pregnancy, as the reason for dismissal. It found that the principal reason for dismissal on 20 December 2018 was underperformance.

The pregnancy discrimination claim failed because the tribunal was not satisfied that Price made the alleged comment, 'at least no one died or got pregnant', or that the claimant had established facts from which discrimination could be inferred. The tribunal also rejected the claimant's related allegations about Price's conduct and found her evidence on those issues inconsistent and unreliable. The claims against David Price and Oliver Saffell were dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant.

The notice pay claim succeeded. The tribunal held that, after completion of probation, the contract did not state what notice the employer had to give, and it declined to imply parity between the parties. It therefore applied the statutory minimum notice period in s.86(1) ERA 1996 and awarded the claimant one week's pay of £235.95. No other monetary awards were made.