Claimant v Olive Jar Digital Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the respondent dismissed the claimant on 21 May 2024 and artificially constructed a narrative that she had resigned on 3 May 2024. The respondent did not have legitimate grounds for dismissal and failed to follow proper process.
The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed on 21 May 2024 without proper notice or justification, rejecting the respondent's defence that she had resigned on 3 May 2024.
The tribunal found for the claimant on her unauthorised deductions claim, which was consequentially linked to the finding that she was dismissed rather than having resigned.
Facts
The claimant was dismissed on 21 May 2024, but the respondent falsely claimed she had resigned on 3 May 2024 based on a handover email. The respondent also made unsubstantiated allegations of gross misconduct including misuse of TOIL and performance issues. Settlement negotiations at £35,000 broke down over the wording of clauses addressing the gross misconduct allegations, which the claimant wanted formally withdrawn and acknowledged as unsubstantiated.
Decision
This was a costs judgment following a successful liability hearing. The tribunal awarded the claimant £15,000 in costs on the basis that the respondent acted unreasonably in defending the claims by persisting with a false narrative that the claimant had resigned and making unjustified allegations of gross misconduct. The tribunal rejected the respondent's counter-application for costs based on the claimant's rejection of a settlement offer.
Practical note
An employer who artificially constructs a resignation narrative and makes unsubstantiated gross misconduct allegations will face a substantial costs award, even where a favourable settlement offer was rejected by a claimant seeking vindication.
Legal authorities cited
Case details
- Case number
- 6008746/2024
- Decision date
- 14 March 2025
- Hearing type
- costs
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- technology
- Represented
- No
- Rep type
- self
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No