Case 6000831/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Coolahan v The Chief Constable of Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary — 2025
- Case reference
- 6000831/2024
- Decision date
- 3 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gray Appearances
- Venue
- Southampton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Coolahan
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case at Southampton from 11 to 15 August 2025 before Employment Judge Gray. The Claimant was represented by Mr Rigby, Counsel, and the Respondent by Mr Patel, Counsel.
The written judgment records that the Claimant's complaints of pregnancy or maternity discrimination and victimisation failed and were dismissed. The only exception mentioned was allegation 3.2.1, which was dismissed on withdrawal by the Claimant.
The judgment notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons will not be provided unless requested in accordance with the note at the end of the decision. No monetary award is recorded in the written judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The tribunal stated that the Claimant's complaints of pregnancy or maternity discrimination failed and were dismissed. The judgment also records that allegation 3.2.1 was dismissed on withdrawal by the Claimant. | Dismissed | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Victimisation | The tribunal stated that the Claimant's victimisation complaint failed and was dismissed. The judgment also records that allegation 3.2.1 was dismissed on withdrawal by the Claimant. | Dismissed | 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.