Case 2601139/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss K A Jardine v Hawthorne Care Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 2601139/2019
- Decision date
- 7 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Blackwell
- Venue
- Nottingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss K A Jardine
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss K A Jardine worked for Hawthorne Care Limited from 10 September 2018 on a probationary basis. The hearing took place at Nottingham on 2 October 2019 before Employment Judge Blackwell sitting alone. The dismissal claim pursued at the hearing was automatic unfair dismissal under s103A ERA 1996, based on two alleged protected disclosures made on 16 November 2018 and repeated in a grievance letter of 19 November 2018: that she had not had moving and handling training, and that her training record was inaccurate.
The tribunal found that both matters were protected disclosures within s43B(1)(b) and (d) ERA 1996. It preferred the respondent's evidence that the relevant manual handling training had taken place on 8 February 2018, accepted that Mr Sudera did not himself inspect the training records but relied on Ms Green, and found that when he dismissed the claimant by letter of 20 November 2018, effective 27 November 2018, he believed she had been properly trained, had refused a reasonable instruction to work with elderly residents, and had had altercations with colleagues. On that basis, the tribunal held that the disclosures were not the reason or principal reason for dismissal and the s103A claim failed.
The breach of contract claim for notice pay and the unlawful deduction from wages claim also failed. The tribunal said the claimant gave no evidence as to the sums claimed and had not proved those losses in her witness evidence or schedule of loss. The judgment also records that all remaining claims were dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The claim was brought as automatic unfair dismissal under s103A ERA 1996. The tribunal found that both alleged disclosures satisfied s43B(1)(b) and (d), but held they were not the reason or principal reason for dismissal. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The claim for notice pay failed because the claimant gave no evidence as to the sums claimed and there was no supporting claim in her schedule of loss. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The unlawful deduction from wages claim failed for the same reason as the notice pay claim: no evidence was given as to the sums claimed, and the claim was not proved. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- s103A ERA 1996
- s43A ERA 1996
- s43B(1)(b) and (d) 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.