Claimant v Pen and Brush Ltd t/a Nusa Kitchen (in Voluntary Liquidation)

The Respondent failed to notify the Claimant of changes to her role or workplace during the protected period, did not carry out any redundancy process before removing her role, failed to notify her of a suitable alternative vacancy (Operations Manager), promoted her less experienced maternity cover into that role, told her on 12 December 2023 she could only return if she accepted a demotion, failed to progress her grievance, and on 3 January 2024 gave her only two options: accept demotion or leave with a payment less than statutory redundancy.

The tribunal found that some allegations of direct pregnancy and maternity discrimination were not well-founded but did not specify which particular allegations failed or the reasons why.

The same acts that constituted pregnancy and maternity discrimination also amounted to detriment under s47c Employment Rights Act 1996, including failure to notify of changes, failure to conduct redundancy process, failure to offer alternative role, promotion of maternity cover, insistence on demotion, failure to progress grievance, and ultimatum of demotion or leaving.

Some complaints of detriment under s47c were not well-founded but the judgment does not specify which particular allegations failed or why.

The Respondent failed to progress the Claimant's grievance in any meaningful way, which the tribunal found constituted victimisation following her protected acts.

One complaint of victimisation was not well-founded but the judgment does not specify which allegation or the reasons for dismissal.

The tribunal found that the complaint of constructive dismissal was not well-founded, though the specific reasoning is not detailed in this judgment.

The tribunal found that the complaint of automatic unfair dismissal was not well-founded, though the specific reasoning is not detailed in this judgment.