Case 2300516/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Websdale v W J King Garages Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 2300516/2018
- Decision date
- 10 April 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Corrigan
- Venue
- Ashford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Websdale
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr R Websdale brought an unfair dismissal claim arising from an alleged constructive dismissal. The tribunal found that his complaints stemmed from conflict with colleague SO, including a grievance about harassment that was upheld in June 2017, after which SO received a written warning. It also found that the claimant had acted confrontationally towards SO, including swearing at him and accepting that he had responded in kind, and that both employees were moved to separate branches after the 7 September 2017 van incident.
The tribunal accepted that the claimant was hit on the arm by SO's van wing mirror, and that the respondent later issued SO with a final written warning for failing to drive with due care and attention on company premises. It held that the transfer to Bromley was not disciplinary but a protective measure intended to keep the two men apart, and noted that the claimant's contract allowed relocation between branches. The tribunal also found that the respondent had reasonable and proper cause to ask the claimant not to attend branches uninvited while he was off sick, after repeated visits to Dartford and a visit to Welling involving SO's wife.
On the claimant's criticism of the 24 October 2017 grievance meeting and the handling of the minutes, the tribunal said the meeting could have been handled better and that Mr King focused on the claimant's culpability rather than exploring the grievance neutrally. However, it found that the respondent was dealing with serious conflict between two employees, had separated them, had taken steps to avoid further incidents, and had not acted in a manner likely to destroy or seriously damage trust and confidence. The tribunal also found that even if there had been breaches, the claimant affirmed the contract by retracting his resignation on 28 September 2017 and again on 7 November 2017 when he wrote that he would not leave.
The tribunal therefore held that the claimant was not constructively dismissed and dismissed the claim. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Pleaded and determined as a constructive unfair dismissal claim; the tribunal found no fundamental breach of contract and no constructive dismissal. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
9 references- s.95 ERA 1996
- Western Excavating (ECC) Ltd v Sharp
- Malik v Bank of Credit & Commerce International implied term
- Croft v Consignia Plc
- Omilaju v Waltham Forest LBC last straw
- s.98 ERA 1996
- Whitbread plc v Hall range of reasonable responses
- s.123(6) ERA 1996
- Nelson v BBC (No 2)
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.