Mr A Savage v Dents Bakery Limited — 2023

The tribunal first dealt with a late application by the respondent for a postponement or, alternatively, for the hearing to go part-heard because its witness Ms Helen Carey was abroad in Tenerife. It refused both applications, finding there were no exceptional circumstances under rule 30A(2) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure and that the delay was caused by the respondent's own omission. The tribunal also held that rule 42 did not prevent it from considering Ms Carey's witness statement, although its weight would be assessed in the absence of cross-examination.

On the facts, the claimant had been employed by the respondent since 6 April 2015. He left work on 31 March 2022 after becoming unwell, and the respondent later learned that he had worked for another bakery while absent. At the return-to-work meeting on 6 April 2022, the tribunal found that he was told disciplinary action could include suspension, but that he became upset and believed he was being suspended. The tribunal accepted that the claimant then left the premises, but found that this did not amount to a resignation on that day.

The tribunal preferred the respondent's evidence and the contemporaneous text messages, and found that the claimant did not resign on 6 April 2022. It noted that when asked in evidence the claimant said he needed legal advice before deciding what to do, and that he did not notify the respondent of any resignation until a letter from his solicitors dated 20 June 2022. Applying section 95(1)(c) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the tribunal held that he had not terminated the contract on 6 April 2022 and therefore had not been dismissed within the statutory definition.

Because there was no dismissal on 6 April 2022, the unfair dismissal claim was dismissed. The breach of contract claim was also dismissed because it was based on the same alleged dismissal and the associated claim for notice pay. No monetary award was made.