Case 3301750/2020 · Employment Tribunal
No attendance; no v Paul Pearson, director — 2021
- Case reference
- 3301750/2020
- Decision date
- 25 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge George
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
No attendance; no
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a remote CVP hearing on 25 January 2021 before Employment Judge George sitting alone, the claimant did not attend. The respondent accepted that the claimant had worked on 1 November 2019 but had not been paid for that day. The tribunal found that she worked 8 hours at a gross hourly rate of £12.98 and ordered the respondent to pay £103.84 gross as arrears of wages, subject to deduction of tax and national insurance contributions.
The claimant also pursued notice pay, which the tribunal treated as a wrongful dismissal claim. On the evidence of the meeting on 1 November 2019, the judge found that performance concerns were raised informally but seriously, that the claimant said she would rather resign than be sacked, and that Mr Pearson said he would accept a resignation. The claimant then left the meeting and the building, texted that she had walked out and later that she had left, and removed her belongings before 8 am on 4 November.
The tribunal concluded that the claimant resigned with immediate effect and that the respondent had not imposed an ultimatum that she should resign or be dismissed. It therefore held that she was not dismissed in circumstances entitling her to notice pay, and the wrongful dismissal claim was dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claimant had worked 8 hours on 1 November 2019 at a gross hourly rate of £12.98 and had not been paid for that day. | Upheld | — | £104 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant resigned with immediate effect and that the respondent did not give an ultimatum that she should resign or be dismissed, so no notice pay was payable. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £104
- across all upheld claims
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.