Case 3200248/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Katarzyna Jachacz v Eggfree Cake Box Walthamstow Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 3200248/2019
- Decision date
- 29 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hallen Members
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
- Panel members
- Dr J Ukemenam, Ms J Henry
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Katarzyna Jachacz
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs Jachacz worked for Eggfree Cake Box Walthamstow Limited from 22 August 2018 as a back of house cake maker. She told Mr Lenain on 15 September 2018 that she was pregnant, and the Tribunal found that Mrs Wright knew of the pregnancy by at least 19 September 2018. Five days later Mrs Wright held an unannounced probation review meeting on 24 September 2018, at which she raised phone use, eating leftover cake and licking cream from her fingers, and said there were concerns about performance targets. The Tribunal accepted the Claimant's evidence that she was not told she was at risk of dismissal at that meeting and was allowed to return to work.
Claims and outcomes
2 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Dismissal alleged to be because of pregnancy contrary to section 18 Equality Act 2010. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Separate allegation that the Respondent failed to undertake a pregnancy risk assessment before dismissal. | Dismissed | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
Legal tests applied
8 references- section 18 Equality Act 2010
- section 136 Equality Act 2010
- Indigo Design Build and Management Ltd v Martinez
- King v The Great Britain-China Centre
- Igen v Wong
- Madarassy v Nomura International PLC
- Nagarajan v London Regional Transport
- Laing v Manchester City Council
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.