Ms I Puslednik v Mr Hafez Awad t/a Moda Cuts 5 Ladies — 2025

The claimant, a hairdresser employed from about August 2018, took leave to travel to Poland because her mother, who had cancer, needed surgery. After a WhatsApp exchange on 8 September 2022 in which the claimant used words that could be read as resignation, the tribunal applied the objective approach in Omar v Epping Forest District Citizens [2023] EAT 132 and found that the words were not seriously meant or really intended. The tribunal accepted that the claimant was upset and emotional, and held that the surrounding messages showed she wanted to continue working rather than resign.

The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed when, on 17 September 2022, she was told that she could not return to work. It rejected the respondent's case that the dismissal was justified by some other substantial reason arising from a breakdown in relations, or by the incident said to have happened on 7 September 2022. Applying s.98(1), (2) and (4) ERA 1996, the tribunal held there was no potentially fair reason for dismissal and that the dismissal was unfair.

On the discrimination complaint, the tribunal accepted that the claimant's mother was a disabled person but found no evidence that the dismissal was because of that disability. It did not accept the claimant's evidence that she had been dismissed because her mother was ill, noted that that allegation did not appear in her witness statement, and found no comparator evidence to support direct disability discrimination by association. The claim of direct disability discrimination was therefore dismissed.

On wrongful dismissal, the tribunal held that the claimant was entitled to 4 weeks' notice under s.86(1) ERA 1996 because she had been employed from August 2018 and had no written contract specifying a longer period. The judgment records the entitlement to notice, but no separate monetary award or final remedy figure is set out in the text provided.