Case 2402674/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs J Costello v City of Liverpool College — 2022
- Case reference
- 2402674/2022
- Decision date
- 28 October 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Parkin Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs J Costello
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs J Costello resigned from her role on 16 December 2021 after a series of events in 2021, including an initial interview about concerns regarding Sophie Park, suspension and investigation after a large download and deletion of files from her home IP address, a letter about returning personal devices, and a grievance about the way the college had handled matters. The tribunal accepted that some of the earlier incidents could in principle form part of a cumulative complaint, but it also found that the suspension and investigation over the data download had reasonable and proper cause, and that the claimant did not raise contemporaneous complaints about several of the matters she later relied on.
The tribunal found that the claimant’s grievance raised wide-ranging concerns, but that the respondent’s later grievance handling did not amount to a repudiatory breach. Laura Rowan’s email on 15 December 2021 saying the grievance outcome would not be ready before the New Year was not accepted as the last straw. The tribunal considered that by then the claimant had already formed a strong expectation that she would be offered a new post with Hybrid Technical Services Ltd, where Sophie Park was then Managing Director.
On the tribunal’s findings, the claimant’s resignation was prompted by the near-certainty of that new job, which she wanted to start in January 2022, rather than by a cumulative breach of contract by the respondent. The tribunal also rejected the suggestion that the absence of an updated contract, the inbox/out-of-office issues, the grievance delay, or the limited contact while she was off sick were enough, separately or together, to destroy trust and confidence. The grievance outcome later upheld only the complaint about the missing updated contract or variation letter and noted that an out-of-office message could have been used, but otherwise found no significant breach; the appeal was unsuccessful apart from those points.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Claim pleaded as unfair constructive dismissal. The tribunal found the claimant had not been constructively dismissed and therefore dismissed the unfair dismissal claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- s.95(1)(c) ERA 1996
- Western Excavating (ECC) v Sharp
- implied term of trust and confidence
- last straw principle
- Lewis v Motorworld Garages Ltd
- Omilaju v Waltham Forest London BC
- 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.