Cases3301366/2024

Claimant v Midshires Care Limited

13 February 2025Before Employment Judge GrahamBury St Edmundshybrid

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Automatic Unfair Dismissalfailed

The tribunal did not find that the dismissal was automatically unfair. Oral reasons were given at the hearing but written reasons were not requested or provided, so the specific basis for rejecting the claim is not detailed in this judgment.

Direct Discrimination(pregnancy)failed

The tribunal found that the claimant's pregnancy discrimination claim was not made out. Oral reasons were given but not recorded in this written judgment.

Direct Discrimination(pregnancy)failed

The tribunal found that the claimant's maternity discrimination claim was not made out. Oral reasons were given but not recorded in this written judgment.

Facts

Miss E Carroll brought claims of automatic unfair dismissal and pregnancy/maternity discrimination against Midshires Care Limited. The case was heard over four days in February 2025 before a full panel. The claimant was represented by Mr G Carroll, appearing as a lay representative, while the respondent was represented by counsel, Mr O Lawrence.

Decision

The tribunal dismissed all of the claimant's claims, finding that neither the automatic unfair dismissal nor the pregnancy and maternity discrimination claims succeeded. The respondent's application for costs was also dismissed.

Practical note

A pregnancy and maternity discrimination claim combined with automatic unfair dismissal failed on the merits after a four-day hearing, with the tribunal also refusing the respondent's costs application.

Case details

Case number
3301366/2024
Decision date
13 February 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
4
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
healthcare
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
lay rep