Case 4102927/2019 · Employment Tribunal
ETZ 4(WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4102927/2019 Hearing at Edinburgh on July 2019 Employment Judge: M A Macleod Tribunal Member: A Mathieson Tribunal Member: J Auld Miss E Spiers v Sherien Ahmed — 2019
- Case reference
- 4102927/2019
- Decision date
- 28 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Murdo Macleod
- Panel members
- A Mathieson, J Auld
Parties
2 namedClaimant
ETZ 4(WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4102927/2019 Hearing at Edinburgh on July 2019 Employment Judge: M A Macleod Tribunal Member: A Mathieson Tribunal Member: J Auld Miss E Spiers
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant worked as a housekeeper for the respondent's guest house from 3 June 2014. She told the respondent that she was pregnant in early 2018 and, in August 2018, said that she intended to return to work after maternity leave but might initially only be able to work weekends because of childcare. In January 2019 the respondent texted that the claimant's last maternity payment would be in January 2019, that a P45 and a letter confirming end of employment would follow, and that there were no shifts available. The tribunal held that this amounted to dismissal, effective from 18 January 2019.
The tribunal rejected the respondent's view that the claimant had to give a return-to-work date before resuming work. It held that, under the Maternity and Parental Leave Etc Regulations 1999, the claimant had an automatic right to return and no obligation to notify the respondent in the way suggested. The tribunal also found that the claimant's service was continuous despite the 2017 closure of the business, because she continued to be regarded as employed and did occasional cleaning shifts for cash. That finding gave the tribunal jurisdiction to hear the unfair dismissal claim, and it concluded that the dismissal was unfair and also automatically unfair under regulation 20.
The tribunal further held that the dismissal was direct discrimination on grounds of pregnancy and maternity because it was based on the claimant being on maternity leave and the respondent's erroneous assumption that she should not be permitted to return without giving a return date. On remedy, the tribunal awarded a basic award of £512, compensatory losses of £1,536, and £500 for loss of statutory rights, making a monetary award of £2,548 subject to recoupment under the 1996 Regulations; the prescribed element ran from 13 March 2019 to 5 June 2019. It also awarded £2,000 for injury to feelings in the lowest Vento band, and awarded two weeks' notice pay. The holiday pay claim was not proved.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that the claimant was dismissed by the respondent's 3 January 2019 text messages and that the dismissal took effect on 18 January 2019. It found that the claimant had qualifying continuity of service despite the 2017 business closure and awarded a basic award and compensatory award forming a monetary award of £2,548 subject to recoupment. | Upheld | — | £2,548 |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The tribunal held that the dismissal was direct discrimination on grounds of pregnancy and maternity because it was linked to the claimant's maternity leave and the respondent's mistaken assumption about her return to work. It awarded £2,000 for injury to feelings in the lowest Vento band. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | £2,000 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal held that the claimant was entitled to notice pay and awarded two weeks' pay. Paragraph 86 states the amount as £256.30, while the concluding order states a total of £4,804. | Upheld | — | £256 |
| Holiday pay | Dismissed because the tribunal heard very little evidence about accrued but untaken holiday and could not find the claim proved. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,804
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £512
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £2,036
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
10 references- Regulation 9(1)(b), Maternity and Parental Leave Etc Regulations 1999
- Regulation 10, Maternity and Parental Leave Etc Regulations 1999
- Regulation 11(1), Maternity and Parental Leave Etc Regulations 1999
- Regulation 20, Maternity and Parental Leave Etc Regulations 1999
- s.108(1) ERA
- s.212(1) ERA
- s.212(3)(c) ERA
- Vento guidelines
- Presidential Guidance on Vento Bands (2017)
- Da'Bell v NSPCC [2010] IRLR 19
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.