Cases1600992/2023

Claimant v Rascals Cafe and Bar Limited

2 April 2024Before Employment Judge MM ThomasWalesremote video

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Constructive Dismissalfailed

The tribunal found that the claimant was not constructively unfairly dismissed. The respondent had not committed a fundamental breach of contract that entitled the claimant to resign and treat herself as dismissed.

Breach of Contractfailed

The tribunal found that the claimant resigned without notice, and therefore no notice pay was due and owing to her. The claim for notice pay was dismissed.

Detrimentfailed

The tribunal found that the claimant was not subjected to detriments for having made a protected disclosure. The respondent had not subjected her to any detriment on the grounds of whistleblowing.

Automatic Unfair Dismissalfailed

The tribunal found that the claimant was not automatically unfairly dismissed for having made a protected disclosure. As there was no dismissal and no protected disclosure causation was established, this claim failed.

Facts

Ms Hughes brought claims against her former employer, Rascals Cafe and Bar Limited, alleging constructive unfair dismissal, unpaid notice pay, detriment for making protected disclosures (whistleblowing), and automatic unfair dismissal for whistleblowing. The case was heard over three days by video link at Cardiff Employment Tribunal. Ms Hughes represented herself while the respondent was represented by a solicitor.

Decision

The tribunal dismissed all of Ms Hughes' claims. They found she was not constructively unfairly dismissed as there was no fundamental breach of contract by the employer. Her notice pay claim failed because she resigned without notice. Her whistleblowing claims also failed as the tribunal found she had not been subjected to detriments or dismissed for making protected disclosures.

Practical note

A claimant representing herself failed to establish any of her claims including constructive dismissal and whistleblowing detriment, highlighting the evidential burden required to prove fundamental breach and causation in protected disclosure cases.

Case details

Case number
1600992/2023
Decision date
2 April 2024
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
3
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
hospitality
Represented
Yes
Rep type
solicitor

Claimant representation

Represented
No