Miss Alex Caulkett v Richard Fulke Johnson and Eve Johnson Houghton T/A Eve Johnson Houghton Racing — 2023

Miss Caulkett was employed by the Respondent as a Stable Lass/Work Rider and lived in tied accommodation at the Stable Bungalow. After a violent incident involving her partner T on 29 September 2021, the Respondent suspended T and then issued disciplinary correspondence alleging gross misconduct by the Claimant. On 12 October 2021 the Respondent sent a second letter saying that it believed the Claimant's employment needed to end because of the allegations and her relationship with T.

The tribunal found that there was no credible evidence for the bullying allegation against G and no credible basis for alleging that the Claimant had walked out of work or taken unauthorised time off. It also found that, from 12 October 2021, the Respondent intentionally restricted the Claimant's access to the Stable Bungalow, did not reassure her that she could return, and allowed her to believe she was homeless. In that context, it held that the Respondent applied illegitimate pressure and that the Claimant entered the COT3 on 15 October 2021 under economic duress, in circumstances where she wanted urgently to secure the eviction letter referred to in the agreement.

The tribunal rescinded the COT3 and held that it was not a valid or enforceable agreement under section 203(2)(e) ERA 1996 or section 144(4) Equality Act 2010. It found that the bars to rescission were not made out, including affirmation and restitutio in integrum. It also held that clause 2 did not settle any pregnancy/maternity allegations because none had been made, and that clause 4 did not objectively extend to the claimant's pregnancy/maternity discrimination claim. The tribunal therefore declared that it had jurisdiction to hear the claims, but it did not determine the substantive merits of unfair dismissal or pregnancy/maternity discrimination and made no monetary award.