Case 3300939/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Ms M. Tibbles v Joint Pub Ventures Ltd — 2026
- Case reference
- 3300939/2025
- Decision date
- 1 July 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Chudleigh Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms M. Tibbles
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment was made under rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024. It recorded that Ms M. Tibbles withdrew case numbers 3300939/2025 and 3305124/2025, without identifying the claim types within those cases.
The tribunal upheld the pregnancy discrimination complaint under section 18 of the Equality Act 2010. Joint Pub Ventures Limited removed four scheduled shifts in October 2024, failed to put Ms Tibbles on the rota or offer her shifts except on five occasions between 16 October 2024 and her dismissal on 23 January 2025, and failed to undertake an adequate pregnancy risk assessment in December 2024. The tribunal found that this was unfavourable treatment because of pregnancy during the protected period.
The victimisation complaint also succeeded. Ms Tibbles's grievance of 20 December 2024 was a protected act under section 27(2), and the tribunal found that the respondent dismissed her because she had done that act. The ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures applied, and the respondent unreasonably failed to comply with it by failing to hold a meeting to discuss the grievance.
For the Equality Act claims, the tribunal awarded £2,072 for cancelled shifts and failure to provide shifts, based on an estimated four shifts a week, and £396.23 for two weeks' net pay after dismissal. It awarded £15,000 for injury to feelings. Interest on those components was £260.67, £45.51 and £1,722.74 respectively, producing a subtotal of £19,497.15. A 10% ACAS uplift of £1,949.72 brought the Equality Act award to £21,446.87.
The breach of contract complaint succeeded because the respondent dismissed Ms Tibbles without her contractual one week's notice. The tribunal awarded £184.61 in damages. It also upheld the holiday pay complaint and awarded £443.04 for 12 days of accrued but untaken holiday, with the respondent to account for any tax and national insurance due. Adding these separate awards to the Equality Act award gives an aggregate of £22,074.52.
The unlawful deduction claim concerning sick pay for 9 October, 20 October, 20 November, 3 December and 10 December 2024 failed. Ms Tibbles was not entitled to contractual sick pay, and the tribunal found that these isolated days of absence did not qualify for statutory sick pay.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The claimant withdrew case numbers 3300939/2025 and 3305124/2025. The judgment does not identify the claim types within those withdrawn cases. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The £21,446.87 award under sections 18 and 27 of the Equality Act 2010 was not fully apportioned between pregnancy discrimination and victimisation. Paragraph 2.1 gives the removed-shift date range as 16 October 2024 to 26 December 2025, although dismissal is dated 23 January 2025; that date range is unclear. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Victimisation | Dismissal followed the protected act of raising a grievance on 20 December 2024. The £21,446.87 award under sections 18 and 27 was not fully apportioned between the two claims. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found wrongful dismissal through failure to give the claimant her contractual one week's notice and awarded damages for breach of contract. | Upheld | — | £185 |
| Holiday pay | Failure to pay for 12 days of accrued but untaken holiday was an unauthorised deduction from wages. The respondent must account for and pay any tax and national insurance due. | Upheld | — | £443 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The sick pay claim failed because the claimant had no contractual sick pay entitlement and the isolated days of sickness did not qualify for statutory sick pay. |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £22,075
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
5 references- Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024, rule 22
- Equality Act 2010, section 18
- Equality Act 2010, sections 27(1) and 27(2)
- ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures
- Employment Tribunals (Interest on Awards in Discrimination Cases) 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.