Claimant v Palmers (St. Albans) Ltd.
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal heard a full merits hearing over two days and determined that the claim of unfair constructive dismissal under sections 94-98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was not well founded. Reasons were given orally at the hearing but not included in this written judgment.
Facts
Miss Bacon brought a claim of unfair constructive dismissal against her former employer, Palmers (St. Albans) Ltd. The case proceeded to a full merits hearing conducted remotely via video over two days in September 2025. The claimant represented herself, while the respondent company was represented by its director, Mr. D. Branch. The tribunal heard evidence and submissions from both parties regarding whether the claimant had been constructively dismissed.
Decision
Employment Judge Tinnion dismissed the claim, finding that the unfair constructive dismissal claim was not well founded. The tribunal gave oral reasons at the hearing explaining why the claim failed, but these reasons were not incorporated into the written judgment.
Practical note
A claimant alleging constructive dismissal must establish that there was a fundamental breach of contract by the employer that entitled them to resign, which this claimant failed to prove.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3304263/2024
- Decision date
- 11 September 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- other
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- in house
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No