Mr C Parkin (counsel) For the v Respondent — 2019

The claimant worked for Finance and Credit Corporation Ltd from 1 November 2011 until summary dismissal on 25 September 2017. The tribunal found that, from 2013, part of her remuneration was paid through Russells Associates Ltd invoices and the remainder was paid directly, and that her 2016 contract recorded an annual salary of £76,965 and a severance payment of not less than £57,723.75 if a wind-down occurred and her role became redundant. At the hearing, the contractual versions of the holiday pay, September salary and Russells invoice complaints were withdrawn, leaving the statutory unlawful deduction from wages and Working Time Regulations claims on those issues.

The unfair dismissal claim succeeded. The tribunal held that, although Mr Cooke was the dismissal decision-maker, the dismissal was substantively and procedurally unfair because the allegations were not the subject of a reasonable investigation and the belief in gross misconduct was not reasonable. On the £10,000 invoice payment, the £15,000 advance, the split salary arrangements and the alleged conflict of interest, the tribunal found that Mr Cooke relied on incomplete or speculative material, did not take sufficient steps to investigate, and did not have a reasonable basis to treat the matters as gross misconduct. It also found procedural failures including the seven-month suspension, insufficient particulars and disclosure of the case against the claimant, and making the dismissal decision before the claimant had amended the hearing notes and provided further documents. The tribunal rejected contributory conduct and Polkey reductions and held that unreasonable ACAS Code breaches justified a 15% uplift.

The separate notice pay breach of contract claim succeeded because the 2016 contract provided for three months' notice and the claimant was dismissed without notice. The termination payment claim failed because the contractual conditions for that payment had not been met: final wind-down accounts had not been produced, audited or approved, and the claimant's position had not become redundant. The tribunal rejected the submission that an implied term prevented dismissal in these circumstances, and it found no breach of contract in the respondent's failure to pay the severance amount.

The holiday pay and September 2017 salary complaints succeeded, and the tribunal made a combined award of £4,684.04 net for those two complaints together without splitting the figure between them. The complaint about the Russells Associates invoices for May to September 2017 also succeeded: the tribunal held that the invoiced sums formed part of the claimant's wages and were properly payable to her, although the question of tax and national insurance treatment was left to the remedies hearing. The respondent's own contract claim was struck out for lack of tribunal jurisdiction and the tribunal said that, even if it had jurisdiction, the claim would have failed on the merits.