Mrs A Gannapureddy v Chester Desserts Ltd and F Mohammed: 2400185/2020 and 2413552/2020
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 03 March 2022 |
| Date | 03 March 2022 |
| Citation | 2400185/2020 and 2413552/2020 |
| Court | Employment Tribunal |
| Published date | 22 March 2022 |
| Subject Matter | Maternity and Pregnancy Rights |
RESERVED JUDGMENT
Case Nos. 2400185/2020
2413552/2020
1
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
Claimant:
Mrs A Gannapureddy
Respondents:
1. Chester Desserts Limited
2. Faisal Mohammed
Heard at:
Manchester (by CVP)
On: 26-30 July 2021. 8
September and 1 November
2021 (in chambers)
Before:
Employment Judge McDonald
Mrs A Eyre
Mr N Williams
REPRESENTATION:
Claimant: Miss M Cornaglia (Counsel)
Respondents: Miss L Amartey (Counsel)
RESERVED JUDGMENT
The judgment of the Tribunal is as follows:
In relation to the First Claim (2400185/2020)
1. The claimant’s claim that she was discriminated against because of
pregnancy and maternity in breach of s.18 of the Equality Act 2010 fails against both
respondents and is dismissed in relation to the following allegations on the List of
Issues relating to this claim: 7(b), 7(f), 7(g).
2. The claimant’s claim that she was discriminated against because of
pregnancy and maternity by the first and second respondents in breach of s.18 of the
Equality Act 2010 succeeds in relation to the following allegations on the List of
Issues relating to this claim: 7(a), 7(c), 7(d), 7(e), 7(h)
RESERVED JUDGMENT
Case Nos. 2400185/2020
2413552/2020
2
3. The claimant’s claim that she was indirectly discriminated against because of
religion or belief in breach of s.19 of the Equality Act 2010 fails against both
respondents and is dismissed.
4. The claimant’s claim that she was subjected to discrimination arising from
disability in breach of s.15 of the Equality Act 2010 fails against both respondents
and is dismissed.
5. The claimant’s claim that the first and second respondents failed to make
reasonable adjustments in breach of s.20 and s.21 of the Equality Act 2010
succeeds.
6. The first respondent made unlawful deductions from the claimant’s wages for
the period 25 September 2019 to 2 October 2019 and from 2 October 2019.
7. The claimants’ claim for an award under s.38 of the Employment Act 2002
fails and is dismissed.
In relation to the Second Claim (2413552/2020)
8. The claimant’s claim that she was discriminated against because of
pregnancy and maternity in breach of s.18 of the Equality Act 2010 fails against both
respondents in relation to the following allegations on the List of Issues relating to
this claim: 5(a) and 5(b).
9. The claimant’s claim that she was discriminated against because of
pregnancy and maternity in breach of s.18 of the Equality Act 2010 succeeds in
relation to allegation 5(c) on the List of Issues relating to this claim as against both
the first and second respondents.
10. The first respondent made unlawful deductions from the claimant’s wages by
failing to pay her notice pay and accrued holiday pay. It did not make unlawful
deductions of arrears of pay.
11. The claimant’s claim that she was victimised in breach of s.27 of the Equality
Act 2010 succeeds in relation to the first and second respondents.
12. The claimant’s claim of “ordinary” unfair dismissal is dismissed because the
claimant was not employed for two years or more.
13. The claimant’s claim of automatic unfair dismissal against the first respondent
under s.99 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 succeeds.
Remedy
1. The total award to the claimant is the sum of £38,677.27. consisting of the
following elements:
a. Compensation under the EqA for which both respondents are jointly
and severally liable: £35,743.72
RESERVED JUDGMENT
Case Nos. 2400185/2020
2413552/2020
3
b. Compensation for unfair dismissal and unlawful deductions from wages
for which the first respondent is solely liable: £2933.55
2. Those sums must be paid to the claimant free of any deductions.
3. The recoupment regulations do not apply.
REASONS ON LIABILITY
Introduction
4. The claimant has brought two claims against the respondents which the
Tribunal has decided should be heard together. In brief, claim number
2400185/2020 (“the first claim”) is a claim of disability discrimination, pregnancy
discrimination and other complaints which was filed on 10 January 2020. Claim
number 2413552/2020 (“the second claim”) includes claims relating to the claimant’s
selection for redundancy, including pregnancy discrimination and automatically unfair
dismissal because of pregnancy. It was filed on 2 September 2020.
Preliminary Matters
5. The first respondent had not filed a response to the first claim. The second
respondent had filed a response to the first claim with very limited details. At a
preliminary hearing on 6 January 2021 Employment Judge Johnson refused
permission for the first respondent to file a response to the first claim out of time, and
also refused an application by the second respondent to amend his response to the
first claim.
6. On the first day we dealt with the following preliminary matters:
The first and second respondents’ participation in relation to the first claim
7. At the start of this final hearing we heard submissions from the parties about
the extent to which the two respondents should be allowed to participate in relation
to the first claim. After hearing submissions and deliberating, we decided that:
• The first respondent should not be allowed to participate in proceedings
in relation to the first claim except to the extent of providing its written
submissions in relation to remedy if that is required.
• The second respondent was allowed to defend the first claim only to the
extent of putting forward evidence, challenging the claimant’s evidence
by cross examination and making submissions on the issue of whether
he was the claimant’s employer and on remedy.
8. On the afternoon of the first day we gave oral reasons for our decision.
Neither party requested those reasons in writing.
To continue reading
Request your trial