Case 3303933/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Mankau (counsel) For the v Respondent — 2025
- Case reference
- 3303933/2023
- Decision date
- 20 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cowen
- Venue
- Watford Tribunal
- Panel members
- Mr J Hutchings, Ms B Robinson
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Ms Mankau (counsel) For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal recorded that the claims of pregnancy discrimination under s.18 EQA and harassment under s.26 EQA succeeded. Those successful allegations related to the removal of a company car and constructive dismissal.
The Tribunal also recorded that the Claimant was constructively unfairly dismissed by the Respondent on 1 February 2024 under s.98 ERA. The written record states that reasons were given orally and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
The Respondent was ordered to pay the Claimant £46,960.12 in total, including £17,000 for injury to feelings for pre-termination discrimination. The judgment does not provide a further breakdown of the award.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The judgment states that pregnancy discrimination under s.18 EQA succeeded in relation to allegations pertaining to company car removal and constructive dismissal, but does not split the award by claim. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Harassment | The judgment states that harassment under s.26 EQA succeeded in relation to allegations pertaining to company car removal and constructive dismissal, but does not split the award by claim. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment states that the claimant was constructively unfairly dismissed on 1 February 2024 under s.98 ERA, but does not split the award by claim. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £46,960
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.18 EQA
- s.26 EQA
- s.98 ERA
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.