Case 3311808/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. T. Edney, CAB Employment Adviser For the v Non-attendance — 2024
- Case reference
- 3311808/2023
- Decision date
- 3 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Douse
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. T. Edney, CAB Employment Adviser For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing took place by CVP at Cambridge before Employment Judge Douse sitting alone. The claimant was represented by a CAB employment adviser, and the respondent did not attend. The judgment was recorded as a preliminary hearing, and the reasons were given orally.
The tribunal held that the claimant's complaint of automatically unfair dismissal was not well-founded and dismissed it. It also held that the complaint of pregnancy discrimination was well-founded and succeeded.
The record states that a separate remedy judgment will be issued in relation to the successful claim. No monetary award is stated in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the complaint of automatically unfair dismissal is not well-founded and is dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The judgment states that the complaint of pregnancy discrimination is well-founded and succeeds; a separate remedy judgment will follow. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.