Case 2301375/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Boyton and Mrs S Burn v The Parochial Church Council of the Ecclesiastical Parish of Holy Trinity Barnes — 2022
- Case reference
- 2301375/2021
- Decision date
- 2 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T Perry Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Boyton and Mrs S Burn
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard constructive unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal claims brought by Mr Boyton and Mrs Burn against the PCC of Holy Trinity Barnes. It applied the statutory dismissal provisions in sections 95 and 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and the constructive dismissal authorities cited in the judgment, including Western Excavating, Malik, Omilaju, Kaur and Williams. The respondent did not seek to advance a potentially fair reason for any dismissal, so the central question was whether either claimant had been constructively dismissed at all.
For Mr Boyton, the tribunal rejected most of the pleaded allegations but found that the email of 21 March 2020, which moved overall communications responsibility to Mr Copsey without first discussing the change with him, was a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. It held that later discussions about finance management and software were not themselves a breach, but were capable of contributing to the earlier breach as a last straw. The tribunal did not accept that the later vision/planning discussions were the operative breach; instead, it found that issues 1.1 and 1.4 together amounted to a breach, and that Mr Boyton resigned in response to them. His constructive dismissal claim therefore succeeded, and the wrongful dismissal claim also succeeded because dismissal was established.
For Mrs Burn, the tribunal found that the handling of the Well issue, the meetings she was excluded from, the way pastoral issues were addressed, and the bag dispute did not amount to a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence, either individually or cumulatively. It found that Reverend Cooke had tried to address the Well dispute informally, that Mrs Burn had not pursued a formal grievance, and that the 9 and 10 November 2020 emails about the bags did not create a repudiatory breach, including because one email was private and not intended to be read by the claimants. The tribunal therefore held that Mrs Burn was not constructively dismissed and dismissed both her unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal claims. No monetary remedy figures were set out in this liability judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Mr Boyton: constructive unfair dismissal. The tribunal found that the 21 March 2020 email moving communications responsibility to Mr Copsey, without prior discussion, was a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence, and that the later finance-system discussions were capable of contributing as a 'last straw'. | Upheld | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Mr Boyton: wrongful dismissal. The tribunal found that he was dismissed, so his notice pay claim succeeded. | Upheld | — | — |
| Constructive dismissal | Mrs Burn: constructive unfair dismissal. The tribunal rejected the allegations about the Well issue, exclusion from meetings, pastoral matters, and the bag incident, and held that none of them amounted individually or cumulatively to a repudiatory breach. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Mrs Burn: wrongful dismissal. The tribunal found that she was not dismissed, so the notice pay claim failed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
9 references- s.95(1)(c) ERA 1996
- s.98 ERA 1996
- Western Excavating (ECC) Ltd v Sharp
- Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA
- Omilaju v Waltham Forest London BC
- Kaur v Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust
- Williams v Governing Body of Alderman Davies Church in Wales Primary School
- Wright v North Ayrshire Council
- ACAS Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary procedures
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.