Claimant v Topmarx Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the claimant did not establish facts from which age discrimination could be inferred, or the respondent provided a non-discriminatory explanation for its treatment of the claimant.
The tribunal concluded that the respondent had not fundamentally breached the claimant's contract of employment such that she was entitled to resign and treat herself as constructively dismissed.
Facts
Mrs Wendy Hudson brought claims against her former employer Topmarx Limited alleging direct age discrimination and constructive unfair dismissal. The case was heard over three days in Southampton before a full tribunal panel. The claimant was represented by her husband as a lay representative, while the respondent was represented by counsel.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed both claims. The constructive dismissal claim failed because the tribunal found no fundamental breach of contract by the employer. The age discrimination claim failed because the claimant did not establish facts suggesting discrimination or the respondent provided legitimate non-discriminatory reasons for its actions.
Practical note
A claimant must establish either a fundamental breach of the implied term of trust and confidence for constructive dismissal, or present prima facie evidence of discriminatory treatment for age discrimination claims to succeed.
Case details
- Case number
- 6002372/2023
- Decision date
- 12 March 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Name
- Topmarx Limited
- Sector
- other
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep