Case 3325505/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr I Thomas v Chancellors Group of Estate Agents — 2021
- Case reference
- 3325505/2019
- Decision date
- 22 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Price Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr I Thomas
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a remote CVP hearing before Employment Judge Price on 4 March 2021. No previous case management hearing had been held, so the tribunal identified the issues at the start of the hearing. The claims identified were constructive dismissal and unlawful deduction from wages or breach of contract. The claimant's case was that his salary fell after he was moved from the High Wycombe office to the Amersham office in 2019 because of lower commission payments, and that this formed part of his constructive unfair dismissal case.
The main issue decided at this hearing was disclosure. The claimant said the bundle was incomplete and sought documents including profit and loss accounts for the High Wycombe and Amersham branches and activity reports relating to him. The respondent accepted that some additional documents should have been disclosed and later provided corrected versions, but also accepted that the documents already disclosed would not show what commission was owed. The tribunal held that cash mat reports and commission reports were highly material to the question whether the claimant's wages or earning potential had reduced and whether that amounted to a breach of contract.
Applying the overriding objective and proportionality, and noting that the claimant was unrepresented and did not have access to the records, the tribunal granted the application for further disclosure. Because the respondent said it would take weeks to reconcile its records and produce the required documents, the hearing was adjourned to a date to be fixed. No liability finding or remedy was determined in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | No merits determination was made. The hearing was adjourned at a date to be fixed after the tribunal ordered further disclosure relevant to the alleged reduction in pay and commission. | Other | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | No merits determination was made. The tribunal granted further disclosure about the claimant's earnings and commission records and adjourned the case before deciding liability. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- overriding objective
- proportionality
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.