Pregnant academic dismissed on fixed-term contract expiry: unfair dismissal and discrimination
An academic who was dismissed when her fixed-term contract expired while pregnant has won her claims for unfair dismissal and pregnancy discrimination. The tribunal awarded £129,133.39.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #pregnancy-discrimination
- #fixed-term-contract
- #redundancy-consultation-failure
- #acas-code-uplift
- #polkey-reduction
Key facts
- Mrs Law was employed by the University of Cumbria on a series of fixed-term contracts, the last as Academic Lead for STEM Outreach funded by the John Fisher Foundation.
- She was dismissed on 31 July 2020 when the fixed-term contract expired, while she was pregnant.
- The tribunal found the dismissal was unfair due to inadequate consultation and failure to consider alternatives.
- The tribunal also found that the dismissal and certain related acts were discriminatory on grounds of pregnancy.
- A Polkey reduction of 35% was applied, reflecting the chance she would have been dismissed anyway.
- The total financial compensation awarded was £129,133.39 after grossing up and deductions.
Timeline
-
Started Academic Lead for STEM Outreach role
Mrs Law began her final fixed-term role, funded by the John Fisher Foundation, initially until 31 July 2019, later extended to 31 July 2020.
-
Achieved four years' continuous service
Mrs Law reached four years' service, but the university did not convert her contract to permanent, citing external funding as objective grounds.
-
Meeting about future role
Mrs Law met with Ms Hunt and Ms Mallebon; she was encouraged to take on zoology teaching and told a lecturer role might be advertised.
-
Discovered pregnancy
Mrs Law discovered she was pregnant and informed her line manager. She later had low PAPP-A, linked to pre-eclampsia risk.
-
HR initiated end-of-contract process
HR emailed Mrs Lowthian about the expiring contract; Mrs Lowthian replied immediately that the role would end.
-
HR13 meeting
Mrs Lowthian held a meeting with Mrs Law, presenting a pre-completed HR13 form. Mrs Lowthian made comments about baby clothes and parenting.
-
Dismissal letter sent
Mrs Law received a letter confirming her post would end on 31 July 2020 due to funding ending.
-
Appeal hearing
Mr Chesser heard Mrs Law's appeal; he was dismissive of her pregnancy concerns and did not investigate further.
-
Employment ended
Mrs Law's fixed-term contract expired and she was dismissed.
-
Liability hearing
The tribunal heard the case over four days, finding unfair dismissal and pregnancy discrimination.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's dismissal on expiry of her fixed-term contract was unfair and whether it amounted to pregnancy discrimination, focusing on the adequacy of the consultation process and the reasons given for the dismissal.
The outcome
The tribunal found that the University of Cumbria unfairly dismissed the claimant and discriminated against her because of her pregnancy.
The key reasons were: inadequate consultation before the contract ended, failure to consider alternative roles, and comments made by the line manager about baby clothes and parenting during a meeting about the end of the contract.
Compensation breakdown:
- Basic award: £2,152.00
- Compensatory award: calculated after a 35% Polkey reduction for the chance she would have been dismissed anyway
- Total compensation: £129,133.39 (after grossing up and deductions)
Lessons & takeaways
- Fixed-term employees are still entitled to proper consultation before dismissal, especially if they are pregnant.
- Employers should consider alternative roles or extensions when a fixed-term contract ends, particularly if the employee has a protected characteristic like pregnancy.
- Comments about pregnancy or parenting during redundancy meetings can be evidence of discrimination.
- The Polkey reduction allows tribunals to reduce compensation if there was a chance the employee would have been dismissed anyway, even if the process was unfair.
What this case shows
This case highlights the risks employers face when handling the end of a fixed-term contract for a pregnant employee. The claimant, an academic leading a STEM outreach programme, was told her role would end when external funding ran out. But the tribunal found that the university rushed the process, held a meeting with a pre-completed form, and made insensitive comments about her pregnancy.
The tribunal also noted that the university did not properly explore alternatives, such as redeployment or extending the contract, even though the claimant had four years' service and a strong track record.
What the university could have done differently
The university could have avoided liability by holding a genuine consultation, considering whether other funding or roles were available, and treating the claimant's pregnancy as a factor requiring extra care. Instead, the line manager's comments about baby clothes and parenting suggested that the pregnancy influenced the decision.
Why this matters
This case is a reminder that fixed-term employees have the same rights as permanent staff when it comes to unfair dismissal and discrimination. Employers cannot simply let a contract expire without a fair process, especially when the employee is pregnant. The substantial award of over £129,000 reflects the seriousness of the failings, even after a 35% reduction for the chance the claimant might have been dismissed anyway.
Similar cases
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.
Control room team leader dismissed over hug and anti-Semitism allegations: unfair but compensation slashed
A tribunal found that MTR Elizabeth Line unfairly dismissed a control room team leader of 11 years over a hug and alleged anti-Semitic comments, but reduced compensation by 75% due to his own conduct.
Area manager dismissed for editing timesheet: procedural failures led to unfair dismissal finding
An area manager was unfairly dismissed after editing a timesheet, but the tribunal found the investigation was flawed and the disciplinary process lacked proper notice. He was awarded £8,026 after reductions for contributory conduct and a Polkey finding.
Dismissed while on sick leave: fixed-term contract not renewed without consultation
A mental health practitioner with 15 years' experience was unfairly dismissed when her fixed-term contract was not renewed while she was on long-term sick leave. The tribunal awarded £33,443.28.