Cases3200019/2024

Claimant v Wilson James Ltd

19 March 2025Before Employment Judge A RaoEast Londonremote video

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Constructive Dismissalfailed

The tribunal heard the complaint of constructive unfair dismissal brought under sections 94 and 95(1)(c) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. After considering the evidence over two days, the tribunal concluded that the claim was not well-founded and dismissed it.

Facts

Mrs Hogg brought a claim for constructive unfair dismissal against Wilson James Limited under sections 94 and 95(1)(c) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The hearing took place over two days via Cloud Video Platform at East London Hearing Centre. The claimant represented herself while the respondent was represented by an employment consultant. Oral reasons were given at the hearing.

Decision

The tribunal dismissed the constructive unfair dismissal claim, finding it was not well-founded. The judgment was delivered orally at the hearing on 19 March 2025.

Practical note

A constructive dismissal claim under ERA 1996 s.95(1)(c) requires the claimant to establish that the employer fundamentally breached the employment contract and that they resigned in response to that breach.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.94ERA 1996 s.95(1)(c)

Case details

Case number
3200019/2024
Decision date
19 March 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
2
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
professional services
Represented
Yes
Rep type
lay rep

Claimant representation

Represented
No