Case 3335391/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Ms L Mankau, of counsel For the v Ms J Akinkuolie, Human Resources Business Partner UNANIMOUS — 2020
- Case reference
- 3335391/2018
- Decision date
- 30 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hyams Members
- Panel members
- Ms B Robinson, Mr D Sagar
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms L Mankau, of counsel For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the Watford CVP hearing on 26-30 October 2020, Employment Judge Hyams sitting with Ms B Robinson and Mr D Sagar gave a unanimous judgment. The tribunal held that the claimant succeeded on the Equality Act claims under sections 18 and 39 and under sections 19 and 39, and also succeeded on the section 80H Employment Rights Act 1996 claim. It further recorded that the claim for unpaid wages succeeded in principle.
The tribunal dismissed the claim brought under section 47C of the Employment Rights Act 1996 read with regulation 19 of the Maternity and Parental Leave etc. Regulations 1999. No remedy figures were fixed in this judgment. The tribunal directed that the remedy or remedies for the successful claims in paragraphs 1 to 3, and the amount of unpaid wages, would be determined at a subsequent hearing listed for 15 December 2020 at 10.00am.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Breach of sections 18 and 39 of the Equality Act 2010. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Sex discrimination | Breach of sections 19 and 39 of the Equality Act 2010. | Upheld | Sex | — |
| Flexible working | Claim under section 80H of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim for unpaid wages succeeded in principle; the amount was left for a later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Parental leave | Breach of section 47C of the Employment Rights Act 1996 read with regulation 19 of the Maternity and Parental Leave etc. Regulations 1999. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.