Head chef victimised after raising discrimination complaint
A head chef who was disciplined and dismissed after making a protected equality act complaint has won her victimisation claim. The tribunal also upheld claims for breach of contract and unlawful deduction from wages.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed by the respondent as a head chef.
- The claimant made a protected act under the Equality Act 2010.
- The claimant was disciplined and dismissed.
- The claimant was replaced by a male head chef.
- The claimant succeeded in her claim of unlawful victimisation.
- The claimant succeeded in her claim for breach of contract (notice pay) and in part for unlawful deduction from wages.
Timeline
-
Preliminary hearing
Employment Judge Heath heard applications to strike out or for deposit orders; all refused.
-
Final hearing
Employment Judge Emery and members heard the case. Judgment given: victimisation claim succeeded; sex and race discrimination claims dismissed; breach of contract and unlawful deduction claims succeeded in part.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was victimised for making a protected act under the Equality Act 2010, and whether she was also discriminated against on grounds of sex and race. It also considered claims for breach of contract and unlawful deduction from wages.
The outcome
The tribunal decided that the claimant's victimisation claim succeeded, meaning her employer treated her unfavourably because she had done a protected act. Her claims for direct sex and race discrimination were dismissed.
The key reason was that the claimant was disciplined and dismissed after raising a complaint about discrimination, and was replaced by a male head chef. The tribunal found this treatment was because of the protected act.
Compensation details were not specified in the judgment, but the claimant succeeded in claims for:
- Breach of contract (notice pay)
- Unlawful deduction from wages (pay in lieu of accrued holiday and 2 days' cover work)
Lessons & takeaways
- Making a protected act under the Equality Act can protect you from retaliation, but you still need to prove the treatment was because of that act.
- Being replaced by someone of a different gender does not automatically prove sex discrimination – the tribunal will look at the full context.
- Keep records of any complaints you make and any subsequent treatment, as this can be key evidence in a victimisation claim.
- If you are dismissed after raising a discrimination complaint, you may have a claim for victimisation even if the underlying discrimination claim fails.
This case shows how making a protected act under the Equality Act can lead to retaliation, and how tribunals will examine the link between the act and the treatment.
What happened
The claimant, a head chef, made a complaint about discrimination – a protected act. Shortly after, she was disciplined and dismissed. She was replaced by a male head chef. The tribunal found that this treatment was because of the protected act, making it unlawful victimisation.
What the employer could have done differently
Queens Hospitality Limited could have investigated the claimant's complaint properly and ensured that any disciplinary action was unrelated to the protected act. By failing to do so, they exposed themselves to a victimisation claim. The tribunal also found that the claimant was owed notice pay and some unpaid wages.
Why this matters
This case is a reminder that employees are protected from retaliation when they raise discrimination concerns. Even if the underlying discrimination claim fails, victimisation can still succeed if the treatment was because of the protected act. For employers, it highlights the importance of separating disciplinary processes from protected acts.
Similar cases
Unfair dismissal and victimisation: former employee awarded £88,519
A former employee of Verifone UK Ltd has been awarded £88,519 after an employment tribunal upheld her claims of unfair dismissal and victimisation, while dismissing her race discrimination complaints.
Fixed-term contract expiry: discrimination claims fail at Middlesex University
A work placement officer with 7 months' service lost her claims of discrimination, harassment, and unfair dismissal after her fixed-term contract expired. The tribunal found no evidence of unlawful treatment.
Deputy Design Director loses redundancy and discrimination claims against Greenland UK
A deputy design director who brought claims of unfair dismissal, discrimination, harassment, victimisation, and unlawful deduction from wages after being made redundant has lost all her claims at the London Central Employment Tribunal.
Healthcare assistant with 3 months' service wins wrongful dismissal claim for notice pay
A healthcare assistant who was dismissed without notice after just three months has been awarded £480 in notice pay. The tribunal rejected his other claims for automatic unfair dismissal, sex discrimination, and breach of contract.