Case 3321126/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Elisabeth Ellis v Weston Turville Golf Club Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 3321126/2021
- Decision date
- 3 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bedeau Representation
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Elisabeth Ellis
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs Elisabeth Ellis worked for The Weston Turville Golf Club Ltd as a full-time Administrator from 1 January 1996 until her resignation took effect on 8 September 2021 after she gave notice on 8 June 2021. The respondent did not present a response and did not attend the final hearing. The tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence that, from March 2021, she was told her duties would be changed and she would be moved into other work, and that she later continued to be given work while on furlough and while signed off sick.
Applying section 95(1)(c) ERA 1996, Western Excavating, the implied term of mutual trust and confidence in Malik, the last-straw authorities in Lewis and Omilaju, and the objective approach in Tullett Prebon, the tribunal held that the respondent had breached the implied term of trust and confidence. It found that the claimant was entitled to resign in response to that treatment and that her resignation amounted to a dismissal. Because the respondent had not shown a potentially fair reason for dismissal, the constructive unfair dismissal claim succeeded.
The tribunal also upheld the financial claims. It found unauthorised deductions from wages because the claimant had been paid statutory sick pay while working, and awarded £3,295.62 net. It awarded £722.54 net for accrued holiday pay, calculated by reference to 14 days at £51.61 net per day. It also upheld the wrongful dismissal or breach of contract claim and awarded £2,664.42 net for notice pay. For unfair dismissal compensation, the tribunal made a basic award of £10,050 and a compensatory award of £4,505, made up of £3,705 for lost wages and £800 for loss of statutory rights. The total award was £21,237.58, and the tribunal noted that no state benefits had been claimed so recoupment did not apply.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Constructive unfair dismissal under s.95(1)(c) ERA 1996. The tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence that her substantive Administrator duties were reassigned, she was required to work while furloughed and while signed off sick, and she resigned on 8 June 2021 giving notice to 8 September 2021. The award recorded for this claim was £10,050 basic award plus £4,505 compensatory award, totalling £14,555. | Upheld | — | £14,555 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found unauthorised deductions from wages because the claimant had worked while being paid statutory sick pay rather than full salary. The net award was £3,295.62. | Upheld | — | £3,296 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal accepted that the holiday year ran from 1 January to 31 December and that the claimant was entitled to 28 days a year. It calculated holiday pay at £51.61 net per day and awarded 14 days, totalling £722.54 net. | Upheld | — | £723 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment described this as a breach of contract or wrongful dismissal claim and awarded notice pay. The tribunal calculated 13 weeks at £285 per week, less sick pay already received, and ordered payment of £2,664.42 net. | Upheld | — | £2,664 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £21,238
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £10,050
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £4,505
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
8 references- s.95(1)(c) Employment Rights Act 1996
- Western Excavating (ECC) Ltd v Sharp
- implied term of mutual trust and confidence
- Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International
- Lewis v Motorworld Garages Ltd
- Omilaju v Waltham Forest London Borough Council
- Tullett Prebon plc v BGC
- ss.114 to 124 Employment Rights Act 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.