Pregnant office administrator dismissed after employer ignored risk assessment request
A tribunal awarded over £10,000 to two office administrators after finding that one was discriminated against due to pregnancy and the other unfairly dismissed. The employer failed to conduct a pregnancy risk assessment and did not provide written employment particulars.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #pregnancy-discrimination
- #sex-discrimination
- #failure-to-conduct-risk-assessment
- #acas-code-uplift
- #unfair-dismissal
- #failure-to-provide-written-particulars
Key facts
- Miss Serban was pregnant at the time of her dismissal.
- The respondent failed to carry out a pregnancy risk assessment despite requests.
- Male employees stared and giggled at the claimants when they bent over to take photos.
- Miss Khajeh was dismissed on 4 April 2019 for alleged poor performance.
- Miss Serban was dismissed on 12 April 2019 after returning from holiday.
- Neither claimant was provided with a written statement of employment particulars.
Timeline
-
Miss Khajeh starts employment
Miss Khajeh began working for the respondent as an office administrator.
-
Miss Serban starts employment
Miss Serban began working for the respondent as an office administrator.
-
Miss Serban announces pregnancy
Miss Serban informed staff, including Mr Abdelmoeti, that she was pregnant.
-
Meeting with Mr Abdelmoeti
The claimants and another employee met with Mr Abdelmoeti to discuss workplace issues, including cleaning and customer complaints.
-
Miss Serban writes to respondent
Miss Serban sent a written request for a pregnancy risk assessment, which was received but not acted upon.
-
Miss Khajeh dismissed
Miss Khajeh was summarily dismissed by letter citing poor performance.
-
Miss Serban dismissed
Miss Serban was summarily dismissed on her return from holiday.
-
Miss Khajeh appeals dismissal
Miss Khajeh wrote an appeal letter, but no appeal hearing was held.
-
Miss Serban appeals dismissal
Miss Serban wrote an appeal letter, but no appeal hearing was held.
-
Remedy hearing
The tribunal awarded compensation to both claimants for successful claims.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the pregnant employee was automatically unfairly dismissed due to pregnancy, whether both employees were subjected to unfavourable treatment because of pregnancy or sex, and whether the non-pregnant employee was unfairly dismissed.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld several claims:
- Miss Serban's claim of unfavourable treatment because of pregnancy (failure to carry out a risk assessment) was successful.
- Miss Serban's claim of direct sex discrimination (male employees making derogatory comments while she bent over) was successful.
- Miss Khajeh's claim of unfair dismissal was successful.
- Miss Khajeh's claim of direct sex discrimination (same incident) was successful.
- Both claimants' complaints of failure to provide written employment particulars were successful.
The total compensation awarded was £10,113.95, which includes:
- Compensation for the pregnancy discrimination and sex discrimination claims
- Compensation for unfair dismissal
- Additional awards for failure to provide written particulars (2 or 4 weeks' pay each)
- Uplift for failure to comply with the ACAS Code of Practice on Discipline and Grievance
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers must conduct a pregnancy risk assessment as soon as they are aware of an employee's pregnancy, even if the employee requests one.
- Dismissing an employee without following a fair procedure, including ignoring appeals, is likely to be found unfair.
- Failing to provide written employment particulars can result in additional compensation of up to 4 weeks' pay.
- Sexual harassment or derogatory comments about women in the workplace can lead to successful discrimination claims.
- Employees with less than two years' service can still bring claims for discrimination and automatic unfair dismissal related to pregnancy.
What this case shows in practice
Two office administrators at Emax Trading Limited faced a hostile work environment and were dismissed within days of each other. One was pregnant and had repeatedly asked for a risk assessment, which the employer ignored. The other was dismissed for alleged poor performance after raising concerns about workplace issues. The tribunal found that the employer's failure to act on the pregnancy risk assessment request was unfavourable treatment because of pregnancy, and that the dismissal of the non-pregnant employee was unfair due to lack of proper process.
What the losing side could have done differently
Emax Trading Limited could have avoided liability by simply conducting a pregnancy risk assessment when asked, and by following a fair disciplinary procedure before dismissing either employee. Providing written employment particulars would also have prevented the additional awards. The tribunal noted that the employer's failure to hold appeal hearings was a significant procedural failing.
Why the result matters for similar claims
This case highlights that pregnancy discrimination claims do not require two years' service, and that even a single failure to carry out a risk assessment can lead to compensation. It also shows that sex discrimination can arise from a toxic workplace culture where derogatory comments about women are tolerated. For employees, it reinforces the importance of documenting requests for reasonable adjustments and any discriminatory behaviour.
Similar cases
Dismissed by email while on maternity leave: a conduct process that never happened
An account manager with 19 years' unblemished service was summarily dismissed by email while on maternity leave, with no investigation or disciplinary hearing. The tribunal awarded £37,310.
Pregnant employee dismissed without risk assessment: discrimination and unfair dismissal
A tribunal found that VPS PVT Limited unfairly dismissed a pregnant employee and discriminated against her by failing to carry out a health and safety risk assessment. The claimant was awarded £23,823.50 in compensation.
Dismissed without notice and discriminated against: a double blow for a former employee
A former employee was unfairly dismissed, wrongfully dismissed without notice, and discriminated against on grounds of sex. The tribunal awarded £16,208.68, including an uplift for the employer's failure to follow the ACAS code.
Tutor unfairly dismissed after employer mistakenly accepted resignation
A tutor with three years' service was unfairly dismissed when her employer wrongly believed she had resigned. The tribunal awarded £1,499.54 for breach of contract and unlawful deduction of wages.