Case 6004451/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Hewitt v Elite Hair Lounge Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6004451/2024
- Decision date
- 8 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Beckett
- Panel members
- Mr N Saunders, Ms E Whitlam
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss J Hewitt
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that the complaint of automatic unfair dismissal was well-founded and that Miss Hewitt was unfairly dismissed. It also upheld a complaint of direct age discrimination, finding that the respondent referred to her age when advising her to terminate her pregnancy.
The tribunal upheld direct pregnancy discrimination on several specified issues. It found that on 4 December 2023, immediately after discovering that the claimant was pregnant, the respondent told her she should get an abortion because she was too young to be pregnant. It also found that on 22 December 2023 she was marked down as late despite being at a medical appointment.
Further, the tribunal found that on 18 January 2024, after the claimant asked about her job following the birth of her child, she received notice of dismissal within minutes. It also found that the respondent logged lateness that did not occur and used a negative tone or reference to the claimant's pregnancy. The tribunal noted representations about issue 4.1.3, concerning refusal to allow attendance at an ultrasound appointment on 26 January 2024, and said it would deal with that as an application to reconsider and invite representations at the remedy hearing. The remaining complaints were dismissed, and the case was to be listed for reconsideration and a remedy hearing via CVP.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment says the complaint of automatic unfair dismissal was well-founded and that the claimant was unfairly dismissed. | Upheld | — | — |
| Age discrimination | The tribunal found direct age discrimination because the respondent made reference to the claimant's age when advising her to terminate her pregnancy. | Upheld | Age | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The tribunal upheld direct pregnancy discrimination in relation to the respondent telling the claimant on 4 December 2023 that she should get an abortion because she was too young to be pregnant, marking her late on 22 December 2023 despite a medical appointment, dismissing her shortly after she asked about her job following the birth of her child on 18 January 2024, and logging lateness that did not occur while using a negative tone/reference to her pregnancy. | 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.