Five Star Events Group Ltd

Case Summary

The claimant alleged she had been unfairly constructively dismissed by the respondent, an event manpower business. The tribunal dismissed the claim on two grounds: first, that the claim was presented late and the tribunal lacked jurisdiction; second, that even if jurisdiction existed, there was no fundamental breach of contract entitling the claimant to resign. The tribunal found the respondent was justified in revoking an informal working from home arrangement and did not pressure the claimant into accepting part-time work.

The claim was dismissed on two grounds: first, the claim was presented outside the time limit, depriving the tribunal of jurisdiction to hear it; second, even if jurisdiction existed, the claimant failed to establish a fundamental breach of contract because the respondent was justified in revoking the informal working from home arrangement, did not pressure the claimant into accepting part-time work, and complied with the Subject Access Request within the extended statutory deadline.

Use these claim-type pages to compare this decision with other published tribunal cases, outcome patterns, and visible award data.

• •Whether the claim was presented within the time limit (jurisdiction/timebar)
• •Whether there was a fundamental breach of contract entitling the claimant to resign and claim constructive dismissal
• •Whether the revocation of an informal working from home arrangement was justified
• •Whether the respondent pressurised the claimant to accept part-time hours
• •Whether the respondent complied with a Subject Access Request within the required timescale

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 8002578/2025 Heard in Glasgow on the 23, 24 and 25 March 2026 Employment Judge L Wiseman Ms L Lees Claimant Represented by Mr N MacDougall, Counsel Five Star Events Group Ltd Respondent Represented by Mr M Hayward, Counsel JUDGMENT OF THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL The tribunal decided to dismiss the claim because:- (a) the claim was presented late and a tribunal does not have jurisdiction to determine the claim and (b) if the tribunal did have jurisdiction to determine the claim, there was no fundamental breach of contract entitling the claimant to resign and claim constructive dismissal. REASONS 1. The claimant presented a claim to the Employment Tribunal alleging she had been unfairly constructively dismissed. 2. The respondent entered a response in which it denied there had been a breach of the claimant’s contract of employment entitling her to resign. 8002578/2025 Page 2 3. The tribunal heard evidence from Mr Keith Montgomery, previously a major share-holder in the respondent business and who is also the claimant’s brother; the claimant; Mr Edward Driver, Chief Executive Officer of the respondent and Ms Charlotte Kellington, Head of People. 4. The tribunal was referred to a jointly produced folder of documents. The tribunal, on the basis of the evidence before it, made the following material findings of fact. Material findings of fact are those facts which are relevant to the legal issues to be determined by the tribunal. Preliminary Issues 5. The representatives, at the commencement of the hearing, noted the respondent relied on a protected conversation having taken place. The claimant disputed this and relied on improper behaviour at that meeting. It was agreed the tribunal …