Claimant v Boots Management Services Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's complaint of breach of Regulation 10 of the Working Time Regulations 1998, finding it was not made out on the evidence presented.
The tribunal dismissed the protected disclosure detriment complaint, finding that the claimant had not established that she suffered detriment on the ground that she had made a protected disclosure.
The tribunal dismissed the constructive unfair dismissal complaint, finding that the respondent had not breached the implied term of trust and confidence such as to entitle the claimant to resign and claim constructive dismissal.
The tribunal dismissed the automatic unfair dismissal complaint under Section 103A, finding that the principal reason for any dismissal was not that the claimant had made a protected disclosure.
The tribunal dismissed the unauthorised deductions from wages complaint, finding that the respondent had not made unlawful deductions from the claimant's wages.
Facts
Ms Anwar brought claims against Boots Management Services Limited relating to working time breaches, protected disclosure detriment, constructive unfair dismissal including automatic unfair dismissal by reason of whistleblowing, and unauthorised deductions from wages. The case was heard over three days with the claimant representing herself and the respondent represented by counsel.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed all of the claimant's claims. The tribunal found that the claimant had not established breaches of working time regulations, that she had not suffered detriment for making protected disclosures, that she had not been constructively dismissed, and that there were no unauthorised deductions from her wages.
Practical note
Unrepresented claimants pursuing multiple complex claims including whistleblowing and constructive dismissal face significant challenges in establishing the necessary legal tests, particularly where the respondent is represented by experienced counsel.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2601526/2021
- Decision date
- 6 October 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- retail
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No