Claimant v G Burr T/a Easy Landscapes — 2023

The claimant brought a claim complaining that he had been unlawfully deprived of notice pay. At the hearing he also referred to a grievance about non-payment of days worked, deductions said to relate to damage to a company vehicle, and a hotel stay, but the judgment ultimately adjudicated the claim as one for unlawful deductions from wages. The claimant worked for the respondent as a contracts manager from 18 May 2022 until the tribunal found that his notice period ran from 19 November 2022 to 17 December 2022, although he started with his new employer, Root One, on 28 November 2022.

A central issue was when the claimant had validly resigned. The tribunal accepted that an earlier resignation in August 2022 had been withdrawn after discussion. It found that the letter written on or about 7 November 2022 was not a clear and unambiguous giving of notice, but instead the opening of a discussion. The tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence that there had been further uncertainty about his new employment and that he emailed again on 19 November 2022 to confirm his notice. On that basis, the tribunal held that notice was finally tendered on 19 November 2022 and expired on 17 December 2022.

The tribunal found that the claimant had started work with Root One on 28 November 2022, before the end of the notice period it had identified. It noted inconsistencies in the dates the claimant had given at different stages, including an assertion in the ET1 that he started his new role on 5 November 2022, which it treated as a typing error, and it considered the claimant's position on dates to be confused. On that basis, it concluded that the respondent was entitled to withhold pay from the point the claimant started with Root One, and that the claimant had not proved that he suffered an unlawful deduction from wages at termination.

The claimant said he was due £2,190.24, that he had been paid £709.24, and that after allowing for £70 for the Glasgow hotel room he said the balance claimed was £1,411. The tribunal held that the claimant had not proved that sum or any unlawful deduction, and dismissed the claim in full. No monetary award was made.