Case 2418579/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss T Collins v Barnabas House Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2418579/2020
- Decision date
- 3 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Youngs Representation
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss T Collins
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss T Collins had worked for Barnabas House Ltd since May 1990 and was Nursery Manager when the employment ended. The dispute arose after a COVID-19 related early years funding issue in July 2020, when she had submitted figures to Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council that were lower than she was entitled to claim. On 13 July 2020 Mrs Cooper telephoned her about the matter after the portal had been reopened to allow the figures to be corrected. The tribunal found that the conversation became tense and that the claimant said, in substance, "I’m not, so you better get cover, I’m off" after Mrs Cooper said, "You’re the manager, manage". The claimant then gathered her belongings, took a file of work documents, left her nursery keys behind, and left the premises around noon.
The tribunal preferred the evidence of Mrs Cooper, Miss Cassidy and Miss Kendall on the key events, including what was said when the claimant left and how her colleagues understood it. Applying the authorities cited in the judgment, including the ordinary meaning approach to resignation and the reasonable listener question, the tribunal held that the claimant's words were unambiguous and meant that she was leaving. It also found that the surrounding conduct supported a resignation: she told colleagues she was going, waited before leaving, and did not take her nursery keys with her.
The tribunal then considered whether this was a heat-of-the-moment resignation and whether the respondent had accepted it too quickly. It found that the claimant had time to reflect before leaving, did not contact the respondent on 14 July 2020 to say she was unwell or that she had not resigned, and did not challenge the respondent's 15 July or 21 July letters until 30 July 2020. The tribunal held that the 48-hour period before the respondent confirmed it had treated the conduct as a resignation was a sufficient cooling-off period in the circumstances. It therefore concluded that the claimant had resigned and had not been dismissed, so the unfair dismissal claim failed. The contractual claim also failed because the claimant resigned without notice and was not wrongfully dismissed; the final judgment records that the breach of contract claim was dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant resigned, so there was no dismissal. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Claim form pleaded wrongful dismissal / notice pay; the judgment framed the issue as breach of contract and found the claimant resigned without notice. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
11 references- s.94 ERA 1996
- s.98 ERA 1996
- s.98(4) ERA 1996
- Kwikfit GB Ltd v Lineham
- Burton v Glycosynth Ltd
- Walmsley v C&R Ferguson Ltd
- Sothern v Frank Charlesly & Co
- Willoughby v CF Capital Ltd
- Polkey v AE Dayton Services Ltd
- s.122(2) ERA 1996
- s.123(6) ERA 1996
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.