Case 3205019/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss K Karpal v Chevron Energy Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 3205019/2022
- Decision date
- 22 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gordon Walker
- Panel members
- Mr P Lush, Ms G McLaughlin
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss K Karpal
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Chevron Energy Limited treated Miss K Karpal unfavourably because of pregnancy related illness contrary to section 18 Equality Act 2010. The successful allegations were the video meeting on 6 June 2022, the comment/question at meetings on 16 May 2022 and 6 June 2022 about why she did not have a termination at another time, the two-week ultimatum to improve or face dismissal, and the constructive dismissal itself.
On limitation, the tribunal held that the constructive discriminatory dismissal claim was presented in time under section 123(1)(a) Equality Act 2010. It also found that all of the successful claims were conduct extending over a period ending with the constructive dismissal within section 123(3)(a). In the alternative, the other claims were presented within such period as the tribunal thought just and equitable under section 123(1)(b).
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's other pregnancy or pregnancy-related unfavourable-treatment claims as not well founded. The extracted text does not set out those dismissed allegations separately.
On remedy-related findings, the tribunal stated that if the discrimination had not occurred the respondent would have given the claimant a further two months to show improvement and would have paid her full salary and benefits during that period. It also found there was a 75% chance that she would have remained employed after that two-month period. No monetary award is stated in the extracted text.
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 | The tribunal upheld a section 18 Equality Act 2010 claim that the respondent treated Miss K Karpal unfavourably because of pregnancy related illness by calling her to a video meeting on 6 June 2022, making a comment/question at meetings on 16 May 2022 and 6 June 2022 about why she did not have a termination at another time, giving her two weeks to improve or face dismissal, and constructively dismissing her. The tribunal held the constructive discriminatory dismissal claim was in time and that the successful matters formed conduct extending over a period ending with the constructive dismissal. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The claimant's other claims of unfavourable treatment because of pregnancy or pregnancy related illness were found not well founded and were dismissed. The extracted text does not identify those separate allegations in further detail. | Dismissed | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- s.18 Equality Act 2010
- s.123(1)(a) Equality Act 2010
- s.123(3)(a) Equality Act 2010
- s.123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010
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.