Case 6008285/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms A 1st v Your Path Ltd, 2nd Respondent: Path First Triage Limited 3rd Respondent: Secretary Of State For Business & Trade — 2026
- Case reference
- 6008285/2024
- Decision date
- 23 July 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Clarkson Representation
Parties
2 namedKey findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Your Path Ltd and Path First Triage Limited jointly employed Ms A. Her contract and maternity policy named Path First Triage, while her payslips named Your Path. The Secretary of State for Business & Trade was added as a third respondent following the companies' insolvency. Ms A had not yet made a claim to the National Insurance Fund.
The unfair dismissal claim succeeded against both employers on the basis of constructive dismissal. Ms A took maternity leave from 14 November 2022 to 13 November 2023 and was not given work on her return. The tribunal found that the lack of communication, failure to arrange keeping in touch days, unpaid November wages, subsequent lack of work and unexplained reductions in pay together amounted to a repudiatory breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. She resigned by letter dated 4 April 2024, giving three months' notice.
The direct sex discrimination claim was dismissed. The tribunal considered whether pregnancy or maternity leave was the principal reason for the treatment. It found that changes nationally affecting Physician Assistants' work and the respondents' changing business model explained the treatment. The business no longer needed an employed PA. The tribunal found that Ms A had not established primary facts capable of showing discrimination.
The indirect sex discrimination claim was also dismissed. Ms A alleged that she had missed face-to-face communication because she was on maternity leave. The tribunal found that she normally worked virtually and was not based in an office with the directors. It therefore rejected the alleged practice of communicating only in the office and found that she had not evidenced another provision, criterion or practice affecting her.
The unlawful deduction from wages claim succeeded. The final order awarded £10,970.37 gross for deductions during November 2023 to July 2024. The July calculation included 11.2 days of annual leave. The judgment stated that Ms A was responsible for any tax or National Insurance payable on the wages award.
For unfair dismissal, the tribunal awarded £2,100 as a basic award, calculated as three weeks at the capped weekly amount of £700. The compensatory award was £49,237.60, comprising £47,500 for one year's lost earnings, £1,237.60 for lost employer pension contributions and £500 for loss of statutory rights.
The total monetary award was £62,307.97. The judgment recorded a prescribed element of £14,007.83 for state benefits received by the hearing, with further relevant benefits received between the hearing and issue of the judgment also to be taken into account. The relevant period ran from 4 July 2024 to the judgment's issue date. At the hearing, the award exceeded the recorded prescribed element by £48,300.14.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Constructive unfair dismissal, upheld against the First and Second Respondents. The award comprises £2,100 basic compensation and £49,237.60 compensatory compensation. The compensatory figure is printed as £49.237.60; its stated components and the overall award confirm £49,237.60. | Upheld | — | £51,338 |
| Sex discrimination | The final order identifies this as direct sex discrimination. The allegations concerned pregnancy or maternity leave. The tribunal found that changes in PA work and the respondents' business model explained the treatment, and that primary facts capable of showing discrimination had not been established. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Sex discrimination | The final order identifies this as indirect sex discrimination. The alleged practice of communicating only in the office was not established, and no other provision, criterion or practice was evidenced. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Gross award for November 2023 to July 2024. The July calculation includes 11.2 days of annual leave. Some pay-period years in the reasons are inconsistent; the period recorded here follows the final wages order. The claimant is responsible for tax and National Insurance. | Upheld | — | £10,970 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £62,308
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £2,100
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £49,238
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
5 references- Repudiatory breach of the implied term of trust and confidence
- Whether pregnancy or maternity leave was the principal reason for constructive dismissal
- Provision, criterion or practice (PCP)
- Primary facts which could show discrimination took place
- Balance of probabilities
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.