Cases3312691/2023

Claimant v Marks and Spencer PLC

15 October 2025Before Employment Judge MargoWatfordhybrid

Outcome

Claimant succeeds

Individual claims

Direct Discrimination(pregnancy)succeeded

The tribunal found that the claimant's role being filled with a permanent replacement employee when the claimant went on maternity leave constituted unlawful discrimination contrary to section 18 of the Equality Act 2010, which protects against unfavourable treatment because of pregnancy and maternity.

Direct Discrimination(disability)succeeded

The tribunal upheld the section 15 Equality Act 2010 claim, finding that the claimant was dismissed (unfavourable treatment) because of something arising in consequence of her disability. This establishes discrimination arising from disability.

Failure to Make Reasonable Adjustments(disability)succeeded

The tribunal found the respondent failed to make reasonable adjustments in three respects: the performance management policy, the practice of advertising new roles to all employees and selected roles externally, and the practice of requiring internal candidates to apply for new roles. These failures placed the claimant at a substantial disadvantage.

Unfair Dismissalsucceeded

The tribunal found the dismissal was unfair. The judgment does not specify the precise reason but given the context of pregnancy discrimination and disability discrimination, the dismissal did not fall within the band of reasonable responses or lacked a fair reason and procedure.

Facts

Ms Downing worked for Marks and Spencer and went on maternity leave. While on leave, her role was filled with a permanent replacement. She later faced performance management issues and was dismissed. The claimant had a disability and argued the respondent failed to make reasonable adjustments to their performance management policy and recruitment practices.

Decision

The tribunal found in favour of Ms Downing on four claims: pregnancy discrimination for replacing her permanently during maternity leave, discrimination arising from disability regarding her dismissal, failure to make reasonable adjustments in multiple policies and practices, and unfair dismissal. A 25% Polkey reduction was applied reflecting the chance she would have been fairly dismissed from an alternative role after six months.

Practical note

Employers must not permanently replace employees on maternity leave and must make reasonable adjustments to both performance management and recruitment processes for disabled employees, or risk multiple successful discrimination claims.

Adjustments

Polkey reduction25%

25% reduction to compensatory award to take into account the prospect that the claimant would have been fairly dismissed from the alternative role of Propositions Manager in Clothing & Home after 6 months of being in that role

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

Equality Act 2010 s.18Equality Act 2010 s.15

Case details

Case number
3312691/2023
Decision date
15 October 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
5
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
retail
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Claimant representation

Represented
No