Cases3305349/2024

Claimant v D & M Bartell Ltd

16 April 2025Before Employment Judge A. TinnionWatfordremote video

Outcome

Partly successful£1,646

Individual claims

Detrimentfailed

The tribunal found that the Respondent dismissed the Claimant for performance-related issues, not because she alleged the Respondent had infringed her right under s.1(1) ERA 1996 to a written statement of particulars. The claim under s.104 ERA 1996 was therefore not well founded.

Otherdismissed on withdrawal

The Claimant's claim for the return of a deposit was withdrawn as the Claimant accepted this dispute had already been resolved and the claim was no longer pursued.

Wrongful Dismissalsucceeded

The tribunal found the claim for wrongful dismissal/notice pay well founded. The Claimant was summarily dismissed and no payment in lieu of notice was made, entitling the Claimant to one week's net wages.

Breach of Contractsucceeded

The tribunal found the Respondent breached its duty under s.1(1) ERA 1996 to provide a written statement of particulars of employment. This was well founded and the tribunal awarded three weeks gross pay as compensation.

Facts

The Claimant was summarily dismissed by the Respondent for performance-related issues. She brought claims including detriment for asserting her right to written particulars, wrongful dismissal, breach of contract for failure to provide written statement of particulars, and return of a deposit. The Respondent sought a postponement and to rely on late documents at the final hearing, both applications dismissed by the tribunal.

Decision

The tribunal dismissed the s.104 detriment claim, finding the dismissal was for performance not for asserting statutory rights. The wrongful dismissal claim succeeded as no notice pay was made following summary dismissal. The s.1(1) breach claim succeeded as no written statement of particulars was provided. The deposit claim was withdrawn. Total award £1,645.54.

Practical note

Employers who summarily dismiss without notice pay and fail to provide written particulars face liability for notice pay plus a mandatory award of 2-4 weeks' gross pay, even where the dismissal itself was for legitimate performance reasons.

Award breakdown

Notice pay£367

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.1(1)ERA 1996 s.104

Case details

Case number
3305349/2024
Decision date
16 April 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
other
Represented
Yes
Rep type
in house

Employment details

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
lay rep