Case 2405916/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S M Carlyon v Connor Associates Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2405916/2020
- Decision date
- 29 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge P Britton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S M Carlyon
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss S M Carlyon was employed by Connor Associates Limited from 9 November 2019 and was summarily dismissed for gross misconduct on 12 March 2020. The tribunal described the case as confined to breach of contract (failure to pay notice pay), because she did not have two years' qualifying service for an unfair dismissal claim. The dispute arose from events on 23 February 2020 at The Grange and Firtrees, including whether she had been authorised by Harry Armer to go to Firtrees and what welfare checks she carried out while away from The Grange.
The tribunal found that the respondent's investigation was inadequate. It said the claimant was not invited to a disciplinary investigation meeting, was not supplied with a disciplinary pack, and that relevant witnesses and records were not properly explored, including phone logs and contemporaneous evidence. It also found the respondent's evidence about what Harry Armer had said was inconsistent, and that the respondent had not sufficiently checked the claimant's account that she was told she could go to Firtrees and continue welfare checks from there.
Applying an objective breach-of-contract analysis, the tribunal held that the respondent had not shown on the balance of probabilities that the claimant's conduct amounted to a repudiatory breach that deprived her of notice pay. It accepted that there were shortcomings by the claimant, but concluded they were not so serious as to justify withholding her contractual notice entitlement. The tribunal found that the contractual notice due was one week's pay, agreed at £248.19 net.
The tribunal then applied section 207A of TULR(C)A 1992. It held that the disciplinary process had not complied with the ACAS Code of Practice in material respects, including investigation and disciplinary stages, and that the appeal did not cure those defects. It therefore increased the award by 20%, adding £49.63, and ordered the respondent to pay a total of £297.82 net. The tribunal said it had no jurisdiction to order a reference or any further sums.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal held that the respondent had not proved that the claimant committed a fundamental breach of contract or gross misconduct so as to justify summary dismissal without notice pay. It awarded one week's net notice pay of £248.19 and added a 20% uplift of £49.63 for failure to comply with the ACAS Code of Practice. | Upheld | — | £298 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £298
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £248
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
3 references- British Home Stores v Burchell
- Taylor v OCR Group Ltd
- s.207A of TULR(C)A 1992
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.