In the case of Mrs E B v Jewellery Validation Service Ltd Mr TB, 72, has been ordered by an employment tribunal to pay compensation to ex-wife Mrs EB, 61, for firing her from his jewellery business as their increasingly mistrustful relationship fell apart.
The couple were married in 2009 and she had worked as bookkeeper at his company in Hatton Garden called Jewellery Validation Service, which trades as Prestige Valuations.
Mr TB claimed she had been made redundant, but the tribunal found he had dismissed her unfairly and she was awarded £8,922.50 in compensation.
Deciding on the award, the panel – chaired by Employment Judge Holly Stout – said: ‘Between the summer of 2021 and the termination of the employment the relationship (in all its respects: marital, personal and work) broke down – in our judgment, irretrievably.
‘Both parties conducted themselves in a way that was calculated or likely to destroy the relationship of trust and confidence between them and which did as a matter of fact in our judgment destroy that relationship.
‘Both parties accused each other of lying and malpractice during this period. Mrs EB for her part accused Mr TB (among other things) of accounting malpractice, of theft from Person X (both of the Trust fund money and a locket), of forging her signature and other documents, of lying about the rental of their flat.
‘He accused her of lying about her whereabouts, about her relationship with Mr Y and many other matters. They both accused each other of lying about property they owned and taking/retaining property belonging to the other and they both contacted the police about each other’s conduct.
‘Moreover, they continue with this conduct. At this hearing, they levelled at each other further accusations of lying. They argued about almost every point of the evidence.
‘They have been unable as yet to reach an amicable settlement in relation to their divorce even though their split took place now 2.5 years ago.
‘Mrs EB has brought not only these legal proceedings against Mr TB, but also has brought or supported at least three other sets of legal proceedings that we have heard about.’
The tribunal found he had dismissed her unfairly.
Mrs EB’s claims of age, disability and marital status discrimination as well as whistle blowing detriments all failed.
This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, we cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.
