Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

In the case of Jarvis v Davies and Davies Estate Agents Limited ET/3323814/2016 the Employment Tribunal held that the Claimant, Ms Jarvis, had been automatically unfairly dismissed and discriminated against by being dismissed because of her pregnancy.

The facts in Jarvis v Davies and Davies Estate Agents Limited

Ms Jarvis commenced employment with Davies and Davies Estate Agents Limited (“Davies”) on 9 November 2015 as a junior negotiator. Davies is an estate agent with thirteen full-time employees, ten of whom are female and three of whom who are male.

On 1 February 2016 Ms Jarvis passed her probationary period and was promoted to the position of sales negotiator by her line manager, Mr Stuart.

Although Ms Jarvis initially performed well (selling the requisite number of properties expected of her), during the course of her employment various concerns were raised regarding her performance, including:

  • That on 23 March 2016 Ms Jarvis had inappropriately criticized Mr Reach, the sales manager, by describing marketing strategies he had been advocating as “a waste of time” (Ms Jarvis subsequently apologies for this)
  • That she was given an informal warning on 6 April 2016 on allegations that she had bullied Ms Begum, another member of staff
  • That she had on one occasion allegedly dressed inappropriately in the office by wearing a short-sleeve dress

On 7 April 2016 Ms Jarvis informed the company that she was pregnant.

On 13 April 2016 Mr Scales sent an email to Mr Davies (director of the business) confirming that he had disciplined Ms Jarvis on allegations of bullying. However, Mr Scales exaggerated the extent and seriousness of Ms Jarvis’ conduct in this email.

On 14 April 2016, Ms Davies (a non-executive director of the business), happened to use Ms Jarvis’ computer whilst she was away from the office on sickness absence (caring for her mother, having informed the business that her mother was ill in hospital with terminal cervical cancer, and that she was currently in a coma). Ms Davies mistakenly opened Ms Jarvis’ personal email account while using the computer and saw that Ms Jarvis’ mother had emailed her – this caused Ms Davies to be suspicious, and Ms Jarvis had previously informed the business that her mother was in a coma. Ms Davies became suspicious that Ms Jarvis might be lying about her pregnancy and proceeded to open a number of Ms Jarvis’ other personal emails.

On attending work the next day Ms Jarvis discovered that someone had accessed her personal email account and had read her personal emails (including emails dating back to 2014 regarding her wedding and that she had suffered a miscarriage). She note that the use of her computer had occurred between 8pm and 9pm the night before, and she became emotional, stressed and tearful. She came to the conclusion that it was only Ms Davies or Mr Scales who could have accessed her account, as she knew that they were the only employees in the office after 7pm the day before. She concluded that Ms Davies had read her emails but could not be sure.

The same day Ms Jarvis approached Mr Reach, marketing manager, and informed him that she believed that she had been treated differently by Mr Scales, Ms Davies, and Mr Rudolf (another manager) in comparison to her non-pregnant colleagues and gave examples of such incidents. She provided details of documents that had been accessed on her computer. Mr Reach contacted Mr Davies, explained what had happened and asked what he should do – Mr Davies said that Mr Reach should meet with Ms Jarvis immediately, ask her to go home while her claims of bullying were investigated, and take notes.

At 11am on the same day Mr Reach met with Ms Jarvis and explained that she would be suspended on full pay while he conducted the investigation into allegations of bullying. Ms Jarvis was upset and said that she would take legal advice. After being addressed on the matter by Mr Davies Mr Reach apologies to Ms Jarvis for using the term ‘suspension’. He stated that Mr Davies would meet with Ms Jarvis on 18 April 2016 to discuss her grievance.

On the same day Mr Davies canvassed the managers at the business to see whether they had any concerns regarding Ms Jarvis’ performance.

On 18 April 2016 Mr Davies met with Ms Jarvis, with Ms Davies acting as a notetaker. During the meeting it was put to Ms Jarvis that she had been given a formal warning previously for bullying and that she had not met targets; Ms Jarvis replied that she had met her targets and that she had not been given a warning. Mr Davies also questioned Ms Jarvis on her personal email account. Ms Jarvis stated that she was not willing to comment on this, apart from to confirm that her mother was in a coma. Ms Jarvis was concerned that the meeting was more akin to a disciplinary hearing than a hearing to consider her grievance.

On 19 April 2016 Mr Reach emailed Ms Jarvis to confirm that she should attend work on 20 April 2016, and that Mr Davies would meet with her on that day. Ms Jarvis replied the same day, stating that she was taking legal advice and that she did not wish to return to work until she had received such. Mr Reach replied to state that she must attend work, and the next day Ms Jarvis emailed him to state that she was unwell. She therefore did not attend work.

Without a further meeting to Ms Jarvis to discuss her absence Mr Davies sent her a letter on 20 April 2016 confirming that she was being dismissed on allegations of misconduct, including (among other things) allegations of bullying and that she had taken an unauthorized leave of absence on 19 April 2016.

Ms Jarvis subsequently brought Employment Tribunal claims for unfair dismissal, automatic unfair dismissal, victimisation, and pregnancy and maternity discrimination.

The decision of the Employment Tribunal in Jarvis v Davies and Davies Estate Agents Limited

The Employment Tribunal upheld Ms Jarvis’s claims for automatic unfair dismissal, victimisation, and pregnancy and maternity discrimination.

Automatic unfair dismissal (section 99 Employment Rights Act 1996)

The Tribunal held that no concerns had been raised that Ms Jarvis had been underperforming until after she had informed the business that she was pregnant. The Tribunal further held that Ms Jarvis was too ill to attend work on 20 April 2016, that Mr Davies knew that she was consulting solicitors regarding her treatment on the grounds of her pregnancy, yet he still proceeded to dismiss her without a disciplinary hearing.

The Tribunal came to the conclusion that the reason or principal reason was related to her pregnancy – the Tribunal did not accept that she was dismissed because of her performance as this was not an issue for either Mr Scales or Mr Reach.

Pregnancy and maternity discrimination (section 18 Equality Act 2010)

The Tribunal held that two allegations of pregnancy and maternity discrimination would be upheld:

  1. That Ms Davies had accessed Ms Jarvis’ personal email account, breaching Ms Jarvis’ privacy – the Tribunal found that there must have been an ulterior motive behind Ms Davies spending 90 minutes accessing Ms Jarvis’ computer; and
  2. That Ms Davies had taken screenshots of Ms Jarvis’ computer with regards to Ms Jarvis’ pregnancy and miscarriage – the Tribunal found that this was a gross breach of privacy and related to her pregnancy

Victimisation (section 27 Equality Act 2010)

The Tribunal held that Ms Jarvis’ protected act (her complaint that she felt that she was being discriminated against) significantly influenced Mr Davies’ approach to Ms Jarvis (that he avoid her grievance and discipline her). The Tribunal therefore upheld her victimisation claim.

 

Our solicitors’ view on Jarvis v Davies and Davies Estate Agents Limited

Chris Hadrill, a specialist employment solicitor at Redmans, commented on the case: “It is extremely important for businesses to undertake fair and impartial disciplinary and grievance procedures, particularly if an employee has raised a grievance that they are being discriminated against. If businesses fail to undertake fair and impartial grievance and disciplinary processes then they could face discrimination and victimisation claims (as the relevant business did here).”

The judgment of the Employment Tribunal can be found here

About

Redmans Employment Team deal with employment matters for both employers and employees, including drafting employment contracts and policies, advising employers and employees on compromise agreements, handling day-to-day HR issues, advising on restructures, and handling Employment Tribunal cases for both employers and employees Call 020 3397 3603 to speak to one of the members of our employment team or email us on enquiries@redmans.co.uk. Redmans have offices in Richmond, Chiswick, Hammersmith, Fulham, Kingston, Wimbledon, Ealing, Kings Cross and Marylebone (meetings strictly by appointment only).

Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

Share →

Our awards

Request a callback

    Your first name (required)

    Your last name (required)

    Your email (required)

    Your telephone number (required)

    Brief details of your enquiry

    Contact us

    Please feel free to discuss your own position and concerns. Contact your nearest office on:

    T: 020 3397 3603
    E: enquiries@redmans.co.uk
    W: www.redmans.co.uk

    Testimonials

    4.76 Average

    235 Reviews

    Paul O

    Chris & Rana guided me through a redundancy discussion. Prompt & patient assistance with the documents & meetings. Clear advice & fast responses regarding negotiations. Would definitely recommend & would use again without hesitation.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Anonymous

    Outstanding, efficient service. Thank you so much!

    Posted 1 month ago

    Jaswant S

    Very very happy with the good service I got Thank you so much for your help

    Posted 1 month ago

    Anonymous

    Mel and Chris were fantastic and supportive throughout! 1000% recommend.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Emma D

    Good responsive service

    Posted 1 month ago

    Mike T

    Good efficient service.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Brenda G

    Very professional and helpful

    Posted 1 month ago

    Charles A

    Chris Hadrill was recommended to me when I found myself in need of a solicitor at very short notice. He contacted me almost immediately to arrange a call. Chris handled my case in a professional and timely manner and kept me notified throughout. Chris inspired confidence and made me feel I was being cared for. If ever I'm in need of legal representation, I would not hesitate to contact Chris. And will gladly recommend him to family and friends.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Rosalind R

    I was very happy with the service that I received from Redmans Solicitors. They were able to advise me accordingly with regards to my employment matter and stay within the agreed costing.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Karl B

    Caroline and Chris were so helpful and friendly. Couldn't of asked for a better service.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Dimitrios P

    Excellent, professional service, in time and within the expected value.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Barbara K

    Everything quickly and fairly. Very professional. Thank you.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Sabrina J

    I received a efficient professional service during the whole process of liasing between myself and my former employer to getting all forms signed and receiving my redundancy payment in full in the summer of this year.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Anonymous

    I received legal advice on a redundancy settlement agreement from Redmans Solicitors and was very impressed by the quality of their service. Chris Hadrill is highly experienced in settlement matters and was especially understanding of the particulars of my case, going out of his way to ensure that it was resolved quickly and with the utmost professionalism. I have no hesitation in recommending Redmans to anyone in need of employment advice and settlement resolution.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Anonymous

    Excellent service, with full explanations of everything needed. Both Chris and Mel answered all emails very promptly and were personable and efficient.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Anonymous

    I would like to thank Chris Hadrill, in particular who handled my case, for all his hard work, expertise and dedication. He listened with empathy and offered suitable advice, which made me feel valued and confident through a difficult time. I would highly recommend Chris and the team at Redmans Solicitors. Thank you.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Yann G

    Yann Guezennec / Chris Hadrill - Thanks for the detailed, informed and professional advice for my settlement. When comprise is the rule I felt we could have been maybe a bit more aggressive from the start. However an acceptable outcome considering the situation. Thank you

    Posted 1 month ago

    Valentina D

    Great service from Mel, she was very good at explaining every part of the settlement agreement and very efficient dealing with the HR team. Very professional team, I would definitely use them again in future if the opportunity came up.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Olaf S

    I was very happy with the service that I have received. Thank You Regards

    Posted 1 month ago

    Rebecca A

    I had a wonderful solicitor called Caroline who was so helpful and gave me all the information I need and explained everything in detail so I was crystal clear. Would highly recommend if you are in need of a solicitor!

    Posted 2 months ago

    Gareth J

    Very efficient, helpful and pragmatic support from Caroline. Happy to work with my requirements / suggestions but also made some very good points which helped to achieve a higher settlement amount. Would highly recommend Caroline and Chris.

    Posted 2 months ago