Miss N Nolan v Catherine Fairfield and Jason Fairfield t/a Appletree Guest House — 2024

The tribunal held that Catherine Fairfield t/a Appletrees was the claimant's employer, and that Jason Fairfield acted as her agent for Equality Act purposes. It accepted that the claimant had asked to be enrolled in the workplace pension scheme in September or October 2019, but she was not enrolled until 13 May 2021, which amounted to a breach of contract. The tribunal also found that the written statement of employment particulars did not correctly identify the legal employer.

On 16 March 2022, the tribunal found that Jason Fairfield told the claimant, in response to her asking whether he would strip the bed, that it was a woman's job. It also found that he said words to the effect of taking her upstairs to show her how to clean a toilet seat and of giving her an instruction manual, but it was not satisfied that he used the further woman's job wording alleged for the toilet-seat incident. The claimant raised Jason Fairfield's behaviour with Catherine Fairfield at a staff meeting on 17 March and again on 4 April when she asked for an apology, but Catherine Fairfield did not indicate that she would address the complaint.

The tribunal held that the conduct found to have occurred, taken together, amounted to a fundamental breach of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence. It therefore found that the claimant had been constructively dismissed and that the constructive unfair dismissal complaint succeeded. It rejected other factual allegations relied on for the dismissal claim, including allegations that Catherine Fairfield ignored the claimant on later dates and that the claimant had already lined up a new job before resigning.

The harassment complaint was upheld only in part. The tribunal found that the woman's job remark amounted to harassment related to sex, but it was not satisfied that the toilet-seat comments were proved to be related to sex, and the remaining harassment allegation failed. Direct sex discrimination was dismissed for the same reason. The tribunal extended time for the discrimination claims on a just and equitable basis, taking into account the claimant's reliance on ACAS and CAB advice, her illness, and the difficulties caused by dyslexia. No final monetary remedy was assessed in this judgment, and a remedy hearing was listed for 7 May 2024.