Claimant v Audio Trading UK Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
Proceedings stayed pending County Court determination of breach of contract claim concerning contractual pay rises, which forms part of the basis for constructive dismissal. Claimant alleged failure to put in place contractually due pay rises from third year of employment as breach of mutual trust and confidence.
Proceedings stayed pending County Court determination. This claim is interlinked with the constructive dismissal claim and remedy calculations depend on the County Court's findings on contractual salary levels.
Proceedings stayed pending County Court determination. Part of the overall claim but not proceeded with at this hearing due to stay being granted.
Proceedings stayed pending County Court determination. Claimant claimed shortfall of wages from August 2022, but determination stayed to avoid inconsistent findings with concurrent County Court proceedings.
Proceedings stayed pending County Court determination. Claimant expressly reserved breach of contract claims regarding bonuses and pay rises for civil court. County Court claim for £82,359 concerns failure to increase basic pay from 17 March 2018 onwards.
Facts
Claimant brought Employment Tribunal claims for constructive unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, unpaid holiday pay and wages shortfall. Respondent failed to file ET3 despite being aware of proceedings through concurrent County Court claim (£82,359) concerning failure to award contractual pay rises. Respondent applied for extension of time to file response at the final hearing itself, providing inadequate explanation for nine-month delay, citing office refurbishment, restructuring, and misunderstanding with solicitors. Claimant's constructive dismissal claim included allegation of failure to award contractual pay rises, which was also subject of County Court proceedings.
Decision
Tribunal refused respondent's application for extension of time to file response due to inadequate explanation for significant delay and respondent's awareness of proceedings through its defence of concurrent County Court claim. However, tribunal stayed Employment Tribunal proceedings pending County Court determination of contractual pay rise issue to avoid risk of inconsistent findings, as this issue was relevant to remedy calculation in constructive dismissal claim. Respondent permitted limited participation at any future remedy hearing (submissions only, no cross-examination on liability).
Practical note
A respondent's failure to engage with tribunal proceedings for nine months will not be excused by vague explanations about office moves and solicitor misunderstandings, particularly where the respondent was actively defending related County Court proceedings, but tribunals will stay proceedings to avoid multiplicity and inconsistent findings where the same contractual issue is determinative in both forums.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3314887/2023
- Decision date
- 3 January 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- retail
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Salary band
- £80,000–£100,000
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister