Mr H Harwood-Janson v Professional Renaissance — 2019

The tribunal found that there was no ASCLA-compliant apprenticeship agreement, so it considered whether the parties had nevertheless entered into a common law contract of apprenticeship. It held that they had. The tribunal accepted that the arrangement was for an 18-month Level 3 AAT accountancy apprenticeship, that the parties described the relationship as an accountancy apprenticeship, and that the contractual intention was an apprenticeship rather than a contract of employment.

On the facts, the tribunal accepted that there were concerns about the claimant's conduct and that the respondent raised issues about phone use, listening and following instructions. It preferred the respondent's account of the 25 April 2019 meeting, finding that the claimant used offensive language in response to criticism and continued swearing after being told his contract was terminated. The tribunal found that the claimant's reaction was sufficiently serious in the context of the small family-run business to undermine the relationship of trust and confidence.

Applying the authorities it cited on apprenticeship contracts and termination, the tribunal concluded that misconduct of this kind was enough to justify ending the apprenticeship because the claimant had become no longer teachable by the respondent. It therefore held that the respondent was entitled to terminate the apprenticeship on the grounds of the claimant's conduct.

The claim for breach of contract was dismissed. No monetary award was made.