Claimant v Nikki Tibbles Wild at Heart Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
The claimant was entitled to salary at £200,000 per annum to 14 December 2023, which the respondent accepted. The respondent failed to pay wages for the period 1 to 14 December 2023. The tribunal awarded £4425.80 net (£7692.30 gross) in respect of this unpaid period.
The claimant was entitled to be paid for one day's accrued but untaken holiday. The respondent failed to pay this. The tribunal awarded £442.58 net (£769.23 gross) in respect of this accrued holiday.
The tribunal found that the claimant was entitled to eight weeks' notice based on the respondent's draft contract which evidenced its intention. The respondent dismissed the claimant on 14 December 2023 without notice. The tribunal found the respondent's reliance on gross misconduct did not justify summary dismissal, particularly as no written contract or disciplinary process informed the claimant of expected standards. The claimant was awarded £17,703.04 net (£30,769.20 gross) for breach of contract representing eight weeks' notice pay.
Facts
Ms McKenzie was employed as Managing Director of a floristry business from June 2022 at a final salary of £200,000. No written contract was ever issued despite drafts being circulated. The relationship deteriorated and the claimant resigned on 5 December 2023. The respondent dismissed her on 14 December 2023 for alleged gross misconduct relating to WhatsApp messages criticising the CEO. The respondent failed to pay final wages, holiday pay, or notice pay. The tribunal found the claimant had created a false contract document to support her notice claim, which it rejected, but nevertheless found she was entitled to eight weeks' notice based on the employer's draft contract evidencing its intentions.
Decision
The tribunal awarded the claimant £22,571.42 net in total, comprising unpaid wages, one day's holiday pay, and eight weeks' notice pay. The tribunal found that the respondent could not rely on gross misconduct to avoid paying notice when it had never issued a written contract setting out standards or disciplinary procedures. The notice period was inferred from the draft contract the employer had intended to issue.
Practical note
An employer cannot rely on gross misconduct to justify summary dismissal if it has failed to provide the employee with a written contract or clear disciplinary standards, and tribunals will infer contractual notice periods from draft contracts evidencing the employer's intentions.
Award breakdown
Award equivalent: 5.9 weeks' gross pay
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2303250/2024
- Decision date
- 15 October 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- retail
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Managing Director
- Salary band
- £100,000+
- Service
- 2 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No