Case 8000512/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Member K Ramsay Tribunal Member S Singh Ms M Rezvani v Ahro Scientific Publishing Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 8000512/2023
- Decision date
- 7 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Murphy Tribunal
- Venue
- Glasgow
- Panel members
- K Ramsay, S Singh
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Member K Ramsay Tribunal Member S Singh Ms M Rezvani
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal proceeded in the absence of both respondents after their non-attendance at the final hearing, and only the claimant gave evidence. The claimant’s former solicitors had withdrawn shortly before the hearing, but the tribunal refused postponement applications and heard the case on the papers and oral evidence available.
The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed by R1 on 22 September 2023. It held that the sequence of communications from R2 on 9, 11 and 22 September 2023, including the request for the office key and the later response of laughing emojis, would objectively be understood as ending the employment relationship on that date. The tribunal found that R2 was the principal decision-maker for R1 and acted as R1’s agent when taking and communicating the dismissal decision, so that R1 contravened section 18 Equality Act 2010 and R2 was personally liable under sections 109 and 110.
On the discrimination claim, the tribunal accepted that the claimant had told R2 that she was pregnant at the end of August 2023, after which the company’s approach to her changed. It found that the dismissal was unfavourable treatment because of pregnancy, that the respondents had not discharged the burden under section 136 Equality Act 2010, and that pregnancy was an effective cause of the dismissal. The tribunal also found that the claimant was within the protected period for section 18 purposes.
On the money claims, the tribunal held that R1 failed to pay the claimant for August 2023 and for the period from 1 to 22 September 2023, amounting to £4,622.24 gross, and failed to pay 12.5 days of accrued untaken holiday, amounting to £1,111.13 gross. It also found a breach of contract because the claimant had contractual entitlement to one month’s notice, awarded damages of £2,062.89, and noted that the claimant mitigated by seeking new work and starting with Royal Voluntary Service on 31 October 2023.
For remedy on the pregnancy discrimination claim, the tribunal awarded £10,000 for injury to feelings, £3,242.95 for financial losses, and £642.78 interest. It declined future loss beyond maternity leave as too speculative, finding that the claimant’s continuing loss would end once maternity allowance and the lower rate of SMP were broadly equivalent. The total award across all successful claims was £21,681.99.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unpaid gross wages for 1 August to 22 September 2023. The tribunal found R1 failed to pay August 2023 wages and wages due up to the dismissal date. | Upheld | — | £4,622 |
| Holiday pay | Unpaid accrued untaken holiday on termination. The tribunal found 12.5 days outstanding as at 22 September 2023 and ordered payment as gross holiday pay. | Upheld | — | £1,111 |
| Breach of contract | Failure to give one calendar month's contractual notice on termination. Damages were assessed as one month's net pay. | Upheld | — | £2,063 |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Dismissal on 22 September 2023 was found to be unfavourable treatment because of pregnancy under section 18 Equality Act 2010. R2 was found to have taken the decision on behalf of R1 and was personally liable under sections 109 and 110; the order at the end of the judgment stated £10,552 injury to feelings and £3,333.73 financial losses, both inclusive of judicial interest, while the reasons later broke this down into £10,000 injury to feelings, £3,242.95 financial losses and £642.78 interest. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | £13,886 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £21,682
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £3,243
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
22 references- s.13 ERA 1996
- Reg 14 Working Time Regulations 1998
- Westwood v Secretary of State for Employment
- s.18 Equality Act 2010
- s.109 Equality Act 2010
- s.110 Equality Act 2010
- s.136 Equality Act 2010
- Gisda Cyf v Barratt
- International Computers Ltd v Kennedy
- Riordan v War Office
- Martin v Glynwed Distribution Ltd
- East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust v Levy
- O'Neill v Governors of St Thomas More RCVA Upper School
- Madarassy v Nomura International plc
- Igen v Wong
- Hewage v Grampian Health Board
- Vento v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police (No 2)
- De Souza v Vinci Construction (UK) Ltd
- Wisbey v Commissioner of the City of London Police
- Ministry of Defence v Hunt
- Abbey National plc v Chagger
- The Industrial Tribunals (Interest on Awards in Discrimination Cases) Regulations 1996
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.