In person For the v Mr N Johnson, Solicitor — 2020

Mr Sutcliffe was employed as a maintenance person from 3 May 2016. The tribunal found that his resignations on 15 May 2017 and 6 June 2017 were voluntary and not constructive dismissal, and that the parties later treated him as being in notice until 5 August 2017. It rejected the allegation that the training-cost agreement had been fabricated or that his signature had been copied onto it, and accepted Mr Somali's evidence that the agreement had been signed before employment began.

On the whistleblowing issue, the tribunal found that the Claimant had not proved a protected disclosure to Mr Bridges on 3 July 2017. It did, however, find that the Claimant's email to Mr Somali that day about fire doors and fire regulations amounted to information tending to show that health or safety was being endangered, so it was a qualifying and protected disclosure under s.43B and s.43C ERA 1996. Even so, the tribunal found that the dismissal with effect from 10 July 2017 was caused by a misunderstanding about whether the Claimant was asking to leave early, not by the protected disclosure, so the s.103A dismissal complaint failed.

The wages complaint succeeded. The parties had agreed holiday pay of £1,012.50, and the tribunal found that £193.50 remained due for the week commencing 1 July 2017 and £576 was due for the balance of the notice period. It found that the contractual training-cost figure was £529 and that, because employment ended after 12 months but within 18 months of the training, 50% was repayable; the deduction of £529 was therefore an error of computation and £264.50 was unlawfully deducted. The total awarded was £2,046.50.