Claimant v Springfields Convenience Store Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the claimant was constructively dismissed. The employer's conduct was found to be a fundamental breach of contract that entitled the claimant to resign and treat himself as dismissed.
The tribunal found the respondent failed to provide the claimant with a written statement of terms and conditions as required under section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, a statutory obligation.
The parties agreed a settlement of the claimant's complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages via ACAS conciliation before the hearing.
The parties agreed a settlement of the claimant's holiday pay complaint via ACAS conciliation before the hearing.
Facts
The claimant worked for the respondent convenience store for 12 years at 38 hours per week earning national minimum wage. He resigned on 10 October 2024 claiming constructive dismissal. The respondent never provided a written statement of employment terms. The claimant found temporary work at Tesco for 22.5 hours per week after his resignation. The respondent failed to submit a response to the claim and sought to postpone the hearing due to ill health but was refused.
Decision
The tribunal upheld the claimant's complaint of constructive unfair dismissal under section 98 ERA 1996 and awarded £25,708.52 comprising basic award of £5,216.64 and compensatory award of £20,491.88 (including loss of statutory rights of £500). The tribunal also awarded £927.96 for the respondent's failure to provide written terms under section 1 ERA 1996. The compensatory award took account of the claimant's mitigation through temporary work at Tesco and included future loss for 13 weeks.
Practical note
Employers who fail to respond to tribunal claims face default judgment, and even a 12-year employee working minimum wage hours can recover substantial compensation for constructive dismissal when they partially mitigate their loss.
Award breakdown
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6021779/2024
- Decision date
- 26 June 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- retail
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep
Employment details
- Service
- 12 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No