Claimant v Warrington Fabrication Company Limited

The tribunal found the claimant was constructively dismissed. The suspension was a knee-jerk reaction without reasonable cause: no investigations to establish written procedures/instructions, no consideration of alternatives such as removing the van, no consultation with HR or line manager. When viewed cumulatively with the delivery of tools left insecurely at claimant's front garden, the conduct breached trust and confidence and the claimant resigned in response.

The tribunal found the respondent committed a repudiatory breach of contract (same as unfair dismissal). The claimant resigned giving one month's notice. Under s.88 ERA the respondent should have paid full pay during notice period but paid only statutory sick pay. The claimant was entitled to the difference.

Withdrawn by claimant at outset of hearing on 4 July 2024 as he accepted he had been paid his accrued but untaken holiday pay in full.

The tribunal found the claimant was entitled to the difference between full pay and statutory sick pay during notice period under s.88 ERA (£801.20). However, no separate award was made as this had already been awarded under the wrongful dismissal claim to avoid double recovery.

Claim relating to alleged 'docking of wages' for arriving home earlier than 'contractual' finish time was withdrawn by the claimant at the preliminary hearing on 23 April 2024.

Claim for damages for theft of tools failed. The tribunal found there was no implied term requiring the respondent to take reasonable care of his tools. The contract contained an express term stating the company could not be held responsible for loss or damage to personal property. Leaving the tools outside was not a breach of trust and confidence in isolation.