Ms E Jimmison v Eteach Group Services Limited HELD AT: Reading Employment Tribunal (By CVP) — 2025

Employment Judge Buckley found that the claimant's complaint of pregnancy discrimination under sections 18 and 29 of the Equality Act 2010 was well-founded. The tribunal concluded that the redundancy process against the claimant was started earlier than it would otherwise have been because of her pregnancy, which led to her dismissal on 1 March 2024. The judge accepted, however, that the claimant would have been dismissed in any event on 25 April 2024 for reasons unrelated to her pregnancy, so losses were limited to the 8-week period between those dates.

The judge described the respondent's evidence as to how and when the redundancy decision was made as 'very unsatisfactory'. There was a lack of contemporaneous documentation, and the witness statements of Mr Weideman (finance director) and Mr Gomez (Group HR Manager) gave the impression that the decision had been made before the claimant disclosed her pregnancy, whereas oral evidence indicated the final decision was made on 28 or 29 January 2024, after she had informed the respondent. The tribunal drew inferences from these matters in line with Laing v Manchester City Council.

The tribunal awarded a total of £10,879.50, comprising £6,073.40 for past financial losses (decreased statutory maternity pay, loss of 8 weeks' earnings net of jobseekers allowance, and loss of value of private health insurance), £306.10 interest on past losses under the 1996 Interest on Awards in Discrimination Cases Regulations, and £4,500 for injury to feelings (placed at the lower-middle of the lower Vento band, with interest absorbed into the figure). The recoupment regulations did not apply.