Ms. M Tokarczyk v Portico Property Limited — 2023

The claimant, Ms M Tokarczyk, worked for Portico Property Limited from 17 October 2017 and was promoted to senior paralegal in May 2020. The tribunal heard liability only and preferred the respondent witnesses on the main factual disputes. It found that the senior paralegal role was a different and enhanced role from paralegal, with additional responsibilities including training, supporting junior staff, and deputising for the head of paralegal.

On the constructive dismissal allegations, the tribunal rejected the claimant’s complaints about the 2019 redundancy exercise, the allocation of work, the June and August 2019 holiday issues, the September 2019 complaint process, the refusal of leave over Christmas, and the monitoring of lateness and breaks. It found that the 2019 redundancy exercise was a genuine reduction in paralegal headcount, that the complaint in September 2019 was handled as an informal mediation request rather than a formal grievance, and that the timekeeping concerns were a reasonable management response.

On the 2020 furlough and redundancy issues, the tribunal found that Mr Sivagnanam was recalled from furlough because Ms Galla needed to free time for her management duties, his offices had picked up more quickly, and cost was also a factor. It found that the claimant’s work remained with Ms Giedyk in Poland, that the claimant was properly placed in a pool of one because the senior paralegal role had ceased or diminished in key respects, and that the respondent did consider alternatives including slotting the claimant into a paralegal role and bumping. The tribunal held that the later offer of a paralegal role was not a demotion but an attempt to retain her.

The direct sex discrimination claim failed because the tribunal found none of the disputed treatment was because of sex. The claimant resigned on 25 November 2020, so the wrongful dismissal and breach of contract notice-pay claims also failed. No remedy was awarded.