Case 3313581/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs M McCusker v Hunters Solicitors LLP — 2026
- Case reference
- 3313581/2023
- Decision date
- 6 May 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Baran
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs M McCusker
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal, Employment Judge Baran sitting alone, recorded that the respondent did not attend or appear at the CVP hearing. The claimant appeared in person. The written judgment states the outcomes without published written reasons, noting that oral summary reasons were given at the hearing.
The claimant's complaint of harassment related to sex contrary to section 26 Equality Act 2010 was well founded and succeeded. Her complaint of victimisation contrary to section 27 Equality Act 2010 was in part well founded and succeeded. The judgment does not set out the factual allegations or distinguish which parts of the victimisation complaint succeeded.
The Tribunal ordered the respondent to pay compensation for discrimination in the total sum of £27,385.60, made up of £22,000 for injury to feelings and £5,385.60 interest. The judgment also found that the respondent failed in its duty to provide the claimant with a written statement of the main terms of employment complying with section 1/section 4 Employment Rights Act 1996.
Under section 38 Employment Act 2002, the Tribunal increased the award by £1,692.31, stated to be four weeks' gross pay. The combined monetary total recorded from the discrimination compensation and the section 38 increase is £29,077.91.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harassment | The judgment records that the complaint of harassment related to sex contrary to section 26 Equality Act 2010 was well founded and succeeded. The discrimination compensation was awarded globally and was not split between harassment and victimisation. | Upheld | Sex | — |
| Victimisation | The judgment records that the complaint of victimisation contrary to section 27 Equality Act 2010 was in part well founded and succeeded. The discrimination compensation was awarded globally and was not split between harassment and victimisation. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | The judgment records that the respondent failed to provide a written statement of the main terms of employment complying with section 1/section 4 Employment Rights Act 1996, and increased the award under section 38 Employment Act 2002 by four weeks' gross pay. | Upheld | — | £1,692 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £29,078
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
4 references- section 26 Equality Act 2010
- section 27 Equality Act 2010
- section 1/section 4 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 38 Employment Act 2002
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.