Case 1402106/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S.A. Parminter Respondent Evolve Child Care Ltd v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 1402106/2022
- Decision date
- 14 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge David Hughes
- Panel members
- Ms Y Ramsaran, Ms L Fellows
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Miss S.A. Parminter Respondent Evolve Child Care Ltd
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Miss S.A. Parminter, worked for Evolve Child Care Ltd as a residential support worker from 3 June 2017 until she resigned on 29 April 2022. Her claims were for constructive unfair dismissal and harassment related to age arising out of events around a handover on 29 March 2022 and subsequent dealings with her manager, Dan Walker.
On the constructive dismissal claim, the tribunal accepted that there had been friction between the claimant and her colleague Amy Morton, but it found that the respondent's response did not amount to a repudiatory breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. It held that Mr Walker's refusal to let the claimant choose not to be rostered with Ms Morton, while inflexible, was not a fundamental breach; that he did in fact try to arrange mediation; and that he investigated the incident of 29 March 2022 while keeping the claimant informed. The tribunal found that the claimant resigned because she did not want to work alongside Ms Morton, rather than because of any breach by the respondent.
On the age harassment claim, the tribunal rejected the claimant's account that Amy Morton said she had Alzheimer's during the handover. It found that the only comment about Alzheimer's came from Sarah Schock, who said she had forgotten her way to work, and that the claimant heard the word and attributed it to Ms Morton because of her perception of earlier friction. As the factual allegation against Ms Morton was not made out, the tribunal dismissed the harassment claim and said the remaining questions under s.26 Equality Act 2010 did not arise.
No remedy arose because both claims were dismissed. The judgment records no award for basic award, compensatory award, injury to feelings, interest, or total compensation.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The tribunal held that the respondent's conduct was not a fundamental breach of contract and was not calculated or likely to destroy or seriously damage trust and confidence. It found Mr Walker did attempt to arrange mediation, did not fail to investigate the 29 March 2022 incident without telling the claimant, and that the claimant resigned because she did not want to work alongside Ms Morton. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Harassment | The tribunal found that the only comment about Alzheimer's disease during the handover was made by Ms Schock, not Amy Morton. Because the factual allegation that Ms Morton made the comment was not accepted, the harassment claim failed and the remaining elements under s.26 Equality Act 2010 did not arise. | Dismissed | Age | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Malik & Mahmud v BCCI
- s.95 ERA 1996
- Equality Act 2010 s.26
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.