Cases3311337/2023

Claimant v Eleven Plus Exams Tuition Limited

28 February 2025Before Employment Judge HyamsWatfordremote video

Outcome

Partly successful£2,201

Individual claims

Discrimination Arising from Disability (s.15)(disability)withdrawn

Claim of disability discrimination was withdrawn by the claimant and dismissed on its withdrawal by Employment Judge M Warren at a preliminary hearing on 15 April 2024.

Breach of Contractsucceeded

Claimant gave 8 weeks' notice as per her contract on 22 June 2023 for termination on 17 August 2023. Respondent asserted claimant agreed to reduce notice to 4 weeks ending 20 July 2023. Tribunal found respondent failed to prove such agreement existed on the balance of probabilities; claimant entitled to full 8 weeks' notice pay.

Unlawful Deduction from Wagessucceeded

Claimant claimed she was short-paid by one day's pay (£103.85 claimed). Tribunal found claimant was told she was not needed for work on 8 July 2023 but was never informed she would not be paid. As a salaried employee, claimant was entitled to be paid regardless of attendance. Tribunal awarded £129.40 representing the actual shortfall.

Breach of Contractfailed

Claimant claimed a week's pay (£620) for delay in starting new employment because respondent failed to provide a reference after initially assuring she would do so. Tribunal held there was no consideration for any contractual promise to provide a reference, as there was no binding agreement to shorten the notice period. The promise to provide a reference was non-contractual.

Facts

Claimant resigned on 22 June 2023 giving 8 weeks' notice to expire 17 August 2023. Respondent's HR Manager proposed reducing notice period to 4 weeks ending 20 July 2023, with final week as paid gardening leave. Claimant disputed agreeing to this, though respondent claimed agreement was reached on 7 July 2023. Contemporaneous Slack and WhatsApp messages showed claimant repeatedly asking for written confirmation and seeking to maintain 8-week notice. Claimant was also told not to attend work on 8 July 2023 but received no confirmation this was unpaid. Respondent initially promised to provide a reference but later refused after concluding claimant's grievance was malicious.

Decision

Tribunal found respondent failed to prove claimant agreed to shorten notice period. Contemporaneous messages showed no clear agreement and claimant's careful approach to seeking written confirmation. Claimant awarded 4 weeks' notice pay (£2,071.32) plus one day's unpaid salary (£129.40) as she was entitled to salary as a salaried employee regardless of whether she was required to work. Claim for reference-related damages failed as there was no contractual obligation to provide one, only a non-binding promise.

Practical note

Where an employer claims an employee agreed to vary a contractual notice period, contemporaneous documentary evidence is critical; the burden lies on the employer to prove such agreement existed on the balance of probabilities.

Award breakdown

Notice pay£2,071
Unpaid wages£129

Award equivalent: 4.2 weeks' gross pay

Legal authorities cited

Hartley v King Edward VI College [2017] UKSC 39, [2017] ICR 774

Statutes

Apportionment Act 1870 s.2Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994 SI 1994/1623 article 3

Case details

Case number
3311337/2023
Decision date
28 February 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
2
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
education
Represented
Yes
Rep type
in house

Employment details

Role
Reasoning Teacher and Online Content Creator
Salary band
£25,000–£30,000
Service
1 years

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
lay rep