Pregnant employee wins £10,282 after employer fails to defend claims
A former employee has been awarded £10,282 after her employer, Heavenly Body Ltd, failed to attend hearings or respond to claims of unfair dismissal and pregnancy discrimination.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The respondent failed to attend hearings and did not respond to tribunal communications.
- The respondent's responses to two claims were struck out for not being actively pursued.
- No response was presented for the third claim, leading to a default judgment.
- The claimant succeeded in claims for unfair dismissal and pregnancy/maternity discrimination.
- The claimant also succeeded in a claim for unauthorised deduction from wages and holiday pay.
Timeline
-
Claims presented
Ms Cheetham presented claims 1804765/2022 and 1806679/2022 against Heavenly Body Ltd.
-
Third claim presented
Ms Cheetham presented claim 1800167/2023 for unauthorised deductions and holiday pay.
-
Case management agenda sent
Claimant's representative sent case management agenda to respondent.
-
Preliminary hearing postponed
Tribunal postponed preliminary hearing to 12 May 2023 and notified respondent.
-
Preliminary hearing
Respondent did not attend; EJ Davies adjourned and attempted contact but failed.
-
Strike out and default judgment
EJ Davies struck out responses to first two claims and entered default judgment on third claim for £1,386.
-
Final hearing
EJ Shepherd heard the case; respondent did not attend. Claimant awarded £858 for unfair dismissal and £9,424 for pregnancy/maternity discrimination.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether to strike out the employer's responses for failing to actively pursue them, and whether the claims for unfair dismissal, pregnancy/maternity discrimination, unauthorised deductions, and holiday pay were well-founded.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out the employer's responses to the first two claims and entered default judgment on the third claim. The claims for unfair dismissal and pregnancy/maternity discrimination were upheld, and the claimant was awarded a total of £10,282.
- Unfair dismissal: £858
- Pregnancy/maternity discrimination: £9,424
- Unauthorised deductions and holiday pay: £1,386 (awarded separately)
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers must actively engage with tribunal proceedings; failure to attend hearings or respond to communications can lead to claims being decided against them by default.
- Pregnancy and maternity discrimination claims can result in significant compensation, especially where the employer does not defend the case.
- Employees who are dismissed while pregnant should seek legal advice promptly, as there are strict time limits for bringing claims.
This case illustrates what can happen when an employer simply ignores tribunal proceedings. The former employee brought claims for unfair dismissal and pregnancy/maternity discrimination after her employment with Heavenly Body Ltd ended. The employer failed to attend hearings, did not respond to tribunal communications, and ultimately had its responses struck out.
What the employer did wrong
Heavenly Body Ltd had multiple opportunities to engage. It was sent case management agendas, notified of hearings, and given warnings that its responses might be struck out. Yet it did not attend the preliminary hearing, and its email addresses became non-functional. The tribunal concluded the employer was not actively pursuing its defence, and struck out its responses. This meant the claims were decided without the employer's input.
Why the result matters
For employees considering similar claims, this case shows that tribunals can and will proceed without an employer who refuses to participate. The claimant was able to succeed on her claims simply by presenting her evidence, as the employer had no opportunity to challenge it. The compensation awarded—£10,282 in total—reflects the seriousness of pregnancy discrimination and the financial impact of losing a job while pregnant.
The case also highlights the importance of keeping the tribunal informed of any changes in contact details. Employers who fail to do so risk having judgments made against them without a fair hearing.
Similar cases
Default judgment against Zobra Limited for unpaid wages, notice and holiday pay
A former employee won £1,819 after Zobra Limited failed to respond to claims of unauthorised wage deductions, breach of contract and unpaid holiday. Claims for unfair dismissal and redundancy were struck out due to insufficient service.
£100,000 award after employer fails to defend unfair dismissal claim
A former employee with 17 years' service was awarded over £100,000 after his employer failed to engage with the tribunal process, leading to a default judgment and strike-out of their response.
Dismissed without a meeting or appeal: a conduct case with big reductions
A former employee of Fairview Grocers Limited was unfairly dismissed without any meeting or right of appeal, but his own conduct led to a 60% cut in compensation. He was awarded £3,752.89 in total.
Unfair dismissal but 100% Polkey reduction due to workplace closure
A former employee was unfairly dismissed but received only limited compensation because the tribunal found he would have been fairly dismissed a month later when the workplace closed. Total award: £12,419.29.