£10,000 “manifestly excessive” injury to feelings award reduced on appeal

The Employment Appeal Tribunal has ruled that an employment tribunal’s £10,000 for injury to feelings award for pregnancy/maternity discrimination was manifestly excessive. The only act of pregnancy/maternity discrimination found by the employment tribunal was that the employer had failed to take adequate steps to deal with a grievance which the employee had twice emailed to it, but which had been blocked by its firewall. As there was limited evidence of injury, the Employment Appeal Tribunal concluded that the award was perverse and substituted an award of £2,000.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal has ruled that an employment tribunal’s £10,000 for injury to feelings award for pregnancy/maternity discrimination was manifestly excessive. The only act of pregnancy/maternity discrimination found by the employment tribunal was that the employer had failed to take adequate steps to deal with a grievance which the employee had twice emailed to it, but which had been blocked by its firewall. As there was limited evidence of injury, the Employment Appeal Tribunal concluded that the award was perverse and substituted an award of £2,000.

Ms Graham was one of nine employees at risk of redundancy. Four new roles were being created. As Ms Graham was pregnant, she asserted her statutory right to be offered one of the new roles in preference to others, arguing it was a suitable available vacancy. Eddie Stobart denied the role was suitable for her and required her to attend a competitive interview. She attended an interview but was unsuccessful.

Ms Graham emailed a grievance but received no response. When she queried this, she was was told to resend it, which she did. When her redundancy was confirmed, she mentioned her unanswered grievance and the HR manager said she would look into it. It later transpired that Ms Graham’s emails had been blocked by the company’s IT firewall system.

While the tribunal accepted that the two grievance emails had been blocked by the company’s firewall, the company knew she was saying she had raised a grievance, and it had not done enough to follow this up. It awarded her £10,000 for injury feelings.

Eddie Stobart appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal, arguing that the award of £10,000 was so excessive that it was perverse. The Employment Appeal Tribunal agreed.

There was limited evidence of injury in this case. The employment tribunal had found there to be a “degree of upset” but there had been no finding that the injury endured beyond the immediate experience of the detriment, and no finding of any adverse effect on Ms Graham’s work, personal life or quality of life.

Given the scant evidence of injury, it had been open to the tribunal to look at the manner of discrimination. Here the discrimination was plainly not overt, it was a one-off act and there was no evidence of ridicule or humiliation.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal allowed the appeal and substituted an award of £2,000, which is towards the lower end of the bottom Vento band.

An employment tribunal cannot make an injury to feelings award if there is no evidence of injury but where evidence is otherwise sparse, an employment tribunal may take the manner of discrimination into account in order to infer the level of upset caused. Relevant factors include:

  • The frequency and duration of exposure to the discriminatory conduct
  • Whether the discrimination is overt
  • The existence of ridicule or humiliation, and
  • Whether it is an act of pregnancy discrimination involving an unborn child.

Source: Lexology

Read more

Latest News

Read More

Why so many smart leaders are terrible at leading people

29 July 2025

Talent Management

29 July 2025

Deepfake interviews. Synthetic faces. Tampered documents. As generative AI reshapes identity fraud, traditional screening methods are being put to the test. Giant Screening CEO Mathew...

Worklife Balance

28 July 2025

The issue isn’t just about time management; it’s about mental bandwidth. The cognitive load of managing multiple priorities can leave little room for self-care, creativity,...

Newsletter

Receive the latest HR news and strategic content

Please note, as per the GDPR Legislation, we need to ensure you are ‘Opted In’ to receive updates from ‘theHRDIRECTOR’. We will NEVER sell, rent, share or give away your data to third parties. We only use it to send information about our products and updates within the HR space To see our Privacy Policy – click here

Latest HR Jobs

Queen Mary University of London – IT Services DirectorateSalary: £54,617 to £60,901 per annum This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered.

University of Sussex – Human Resources Salary: £25,733 to £29,179. Grade 4, per annum, pro rata if part time This provides summary information and comment

UCL – Chemistry Department / Faculty of Mathematical & Physical SciencesSalary: £54,172 to £63,752 This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered.

University of Oxford – Department of PsychiatrySalary: £31,459 to £36,616 (discretionary range to £39,749) per annum. Grade 5 This provides summary information and comment on

Read the latest digital issue of theHRDIRECTOR for FREE

Read the latest digital issue of theHRDIRECTOR for FREE