Case 2400936/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Aaron Sunter v Buildakit (UK) Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2400936/2022
- Decision date
- 30 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Poynton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Aaron Sunter
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Aaron Sunter was employed by Buildakit (UK) Ltd from 1 May 2016 until he resigned with immediate effect on 31 October 2021. He brought claims for constructive unfair dismissal and unlawful deductions from wages. The tribunal found that the relevant issues were whether a series of events amounted to a fundamental breach of the implied term of trust and confidence, and whether there had been any contractual entitlement to two weeks' full pay during sickness absence after an operation on 24 September 2021.
On the earlier incidents relied on as part of the constructive dismissal case, the tribunal found that the April 2020 WhatsApp concerns and the resulting letter of 3 April 2020 did not amount to a breach of contract, and that there was reasonable and proper cause for the Respondent's response. The July 2020 sign dispute involved a heated exchange, and the tribunal accepted that Mr Richardson swore at the Claimant, but found this was an isolated incident in the heat of the moment, not conduct that destroyed or seriously damaged trust and confidence. The September 2021 accident at work did not found a breach either: the tribunal found the Respondent reasonably expected the Claimant to do light duties on return, and did not require anything beyond that.
On the pay issue, the tribunal preferred the contemporaneous record of the 6 August 2021 discussion and found there was no agreement to pay the Claimant two weeks at his contractual rate if he were off sick. The contract itself provided for Statutory Sick Pay, and the Claimant was paid SSP in accordance with those terms. Because there was no agreement and therefore no breach, the tribunal held there was no unlawful deduction from wages and no repudiatory breach capable of supporting constructive dismissal. The Claimant had resigned due to his belief that he should have been paid contractual sick pay, but the claims were both dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The tribunal treated the complaint as a constructive unfair dismissal claim brought under s.95(1)(c) ERA 1996 and dismissed it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim concerned an alleged entitlement to two weeks' contractual sick pay from 24 September 2021; the tribunal found no such agreement existed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- s.95(1)(c) ERA 1996
- Western Excavating Ltd v Sharp
- Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA
- Baldwin v Brighton & Hove City Council
- Lewis v Motorworld Garages Ltd
- London Borough of Waltham Forest v Omilaju
- Kaur v Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust
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.