Case 1803015/2020 · Employment Tribunal
In Person For the v Mr A Odabas (Director) — 2020
- Case reference
- 1803015/2020
- Decision date
- 24 November 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge RS Drake
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In Person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal accepted that the claimant had been continuously employed from 1 September 2013, following the June 2019 transfer of the restaurant business to West Park Lounge Limited under TUPE. The main dispute was whether his employment ended by resignation on 3 March 2020 or by dismissal on 27 March 2020. The claimant had been absent from work from 17 February 2020 because of back pain, and the tribunal found that he did not submit his fit notes until 27 March 2020.
On the evidence, the tribunal found that during the 3 March 2020 home visit the claimant said words to the effect that he was not returning to work. Applying the principles in Western Excavating and the approach to ambiguous words discussed in Sothern, Kwik-Fit and Willoughby, the tribunal held that Mr Odabas reasonably understood this as a present and permanent intention to end the employment. The tribunal therefore found that the claimant resigned on 3 March 2020 and was not dismissed expressly or constructively on that date, or on 27 March 2020.
Because the tribunal found no dismissal, the unfair dismissal and breach of contract claims failed. The holiday pay claim under the Working Time Regulations 1998 also failed: the tribunal found that the claimant had already taken 12 days leave while visiting his father, against a proportionate entitlement of 4.5 days as at 3 March 2020. However, the tribunal found that he had not been paid from 17 February to 3 March 2020, and held that this amounted to an unlawful deduction from wages under section 13 ERA 1996.
The tribunal awarded the claimant £566.55, calculated as 15 days at a daily rate of £37.77. No separate dismissal remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant resigned on 3 March 2020 and was not dismissed expressly or constructively, so the s.94 ERA claim failed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The notice/pay-in-lieu aspect failed for the same reason: the tribunal found no express or constructive dismissal and no contractual breach giving rise to damages. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the claimant had taken 12 days leave while visiting his father and had only a proportionate entitlement of 4.5 days by 3 March 2020. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Awarded for unpaid wages from 17 February to 3 March 2020, calculated as 15 days at the daily rate of £37.77. | Upheld | — | £567 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £567
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
6 references- s.95 ERA 1996
- Western Excavating (ECC) v Sharp
- Sothern v Franks Charlesly & Co
- Kwik-Fit Ltd v Lineham
- Willoughby v CF Capital
- s.13 ERA 1996
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.