Mr. J. Mayall, solicitor For the v Respondent — 2019

The Tribunal proceeded in the Respondent's absence after refusing to allow a response to be lodged out of time. It found the Respondent had notice of the proceedings, had missed the original and extended deadlines, and had only applied to submit a draft ET3 the evening before the hearing.

The Tribunal found that the Claimant's employment began in September 2015 and ended on 7 January 2019 when she was told to leave the premises and not return. It accepted that she had not been paid her December 2018 salary, had been locked out of the business account, and was removed as statutory director and secretary without her knowledge or consent.

The Tribunal concluded that the reason for dismissal was alleged conduct, which was a potentially fair reason, but that the dismissal was unfair because the Respondent followed no disciplinary procedure and the procedure and decision fell outside the band of reasonable responses. It made no finding of culpability by the Claimant and made no Polkey or contributory fault reduction. It also upheld claims for unpaid notice pay and December 2018 salary.