Case 6013922/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss N Ogilvie v Alexander Optometrists Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6013922/2024
- Decision date
- 19 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gould Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss N Ogilvie
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant, Miss N Ogilvie, brought a claim of unfair constructive dismissal against Alexander Optometrists Ltd, alleging breach of the implied terms of mutual trust and confidence and the duty to provide a safe workplace. She resigned with notice on 12 July 2024, relying on a final straw said to have occurred on 11 June 2024, when she was offered a payout to leave and told by Mr Surtees that he was not going to change, together with her job being advertised while she was on sick leave. A holiday pay claim was withdrawn during the hearing as the monies had been paid.
Employment Judge Gould, sitting alone, held that the complaint of unfair (constructive) dismissal was well-founded. The Respondent had contended that any dismissal was for the potentially fair reason of conduct (alleged bullying of staff and the Claimant's behaviour on 11 June 2024) and raised arguments on contributory fault, ACAS Code compliance and a Polkey reduction; these matters, alongside the question of whether the Claimant might have left employment in any event, were left to be addressed at a remedy hearing.
The tribunal directed that a further hearing be listed to deal with outstanding remedy issues, to be held by video with a time estimate of 1 day. The remedy hearing may also consider whether any award should be increased under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 in respect of section 1 written statement particulars under the Employment Rights Act 1996.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Tribunal found the Claimant's complaint of unfair (constructive) dismissal well-founded. Liability only; remedy to be determined at a further hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Holiday pay claim dismissed upon withdrawal after monies owed were paid to the Claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures
- Polkey
- section 38 of the Employment Act 2002
- sections 1, 3(1)(b)(ii) and 3(1)(c) of the 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.