Dismissed during pregnancy: employer failed to follow any procedure
A former employee with 17 months' service won nearly £20,000 after being unfairly dismissed and discriminated against due to pregnancy. The employer failed to follow any statutory procedure.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant commenced employment on 6 January 2020.
- The effective date of termination was 16 June 2021.
- The claimant had 17 months and 10 days of continuous service.
- The respondent failed to follow statutory procedures.
- The claimant succeeded in claims for unfair dismissal and pregnancy discrimination.
Timeline
-
Employment commenced
Jenna Carter started working for Scammell Groundworks Ltd.
-
Effective date of termination
The claimant's employment ended.
-
New employment commenced
The claimant started a new job, cutting off future loss of earnings.
-
Remedy hearing
The tribunal heard the remedy hearing and determined compensation.
-
Judgment issued
Employment Judge Allen issued the judgment in favor of the claimant.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed and discriminated against because of pregnancy. The employer did not follow any statutory dismissal process and the dismissal was linked to her pregnancy.
The outcome
The tribunal ruled in favour of the former employee on both claims: unfair dismissal and pregnancy discrimination.
Key reasons:
- The employer failed to follow any statutory dismissal procedure, making the dismissal automatically unfair.
- The dismissal was found to be because of pregnancy, constituting direct sex discrimination.
Compensation breakdown:
- Basic award / wrongful dismissal: £673.24
- Compensatory award (loss of earnings and loss of statutory rights): £9,062.48
- Discrimination award (injury to feelings plus interest): £10,177.04
- Total: £19,912.76
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers must follow a fair procedure before dismissing any employee, regardless of length of service.
- Dismissing an employee because of pregnancy is automatically unfair and amounts to sex discrimination.
- Even short-serving employees can bring claims for discrimination and unfair dismissal if the reason is pregnancy.
- Failure to follow statutory procedures can increase compensation by up to 25%.
A dismissal without process
This case shows what happens when an employer ignores basic employment rights. The former employee, who had worked for Scammell Groundworks Ltd for just 17 months, was dismissed while pregnant. The employer did not follow any statutory dismissal procedure — no written reasons, no opportunity to respond, no appeal. The tribunal found that the dismissal was directly linked to her pregnancy, making it both automatically unfair and discriminatory.
What the employer could have done differently
A fair process would have required the employer to inform the employee of the reasons for potential dismissal, hold a meeting to discuss those reasons, allow her to be accompanied, and consider any representations before making a decision. None of this happened. Had the employer followed even a basic procedure, the outcome might have been different, or at least the compensation could have been reduced.
Why this result matters
This case is a reminder that pregnancy discrimination is taken seriously by employment tribunals. Even with limited service, employees are protected from dismissal because of pregnancy. The award of £10,177.04 for injury to feelings reflects the distress caused. The total compensation of nearly £20,000 also includes an uplift for the employer's failure to follow statutory procedures. For anyone in a similar situation, this case shows that bringing a claim in person is possible, and that tribunals will enforce the law even when the employer is in liquidation.
Similar cases
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.
Dismissed for childcare absences: reinstatement offer saved employer from automatic unfair dismissal claim
A retail sales advisor was dismissed during probation for eight absences, five of which were for childcare. The tribunal found no automatic unfair dismissal because the employer offered reinstatement two days later, which the claimant rejected.
Pregnancy discrimination claim struck out: the importance of early conciliation
A former employee's pregnancy discrimination and unfair dismissal claim was thrown out because she lodged her claim without an Acas early conciliation certificate. The tribunal ruled it had no jurisdiction.
Pregnancy discrimination claim succeeds after employer fails to respond
A former employee won over £41,000 in compensation for sex discrimination and unfair dismissal after her employer failed to defend the claim.