A SHOP worker who was subjected to a terrifying ordeal at the hands of an armed robber has taken her employer to court for constructive dismissal.

Sharon Watson was assistant manager of the Spar shop, in Haughton, Darlington, when she was held at knifepoint by robber Gary Pattison in July last year.

Pattison, who also carried out attacks in other North-East stores in a ten-day reign of terror, was sentenced to 15 years in prison at Teesside Crown Court in January.

Miss Watson, of the Red Hall estate, Darlington, who had worked at the shop for five years, was left severely traumatised and suffered panic attacks.

The mother-of-two resigned in November 2002 and started proceedings to take her employer, Peter Cooper, to an employment tribunal for constructive dismissal on the grounds of breach of contract.

In evidence presented to the tribunal in Newcastle, Miss Watson said she had asked him for extra-security to be implemented in the store and insisted that she was not left alone at work.

She told the tribunal that she felt harrassed and intimidated into going back to work after the raid.

In a written statement, Miss Watson, said: "I was not ready. I have suffered from panic attacks ever since the robbery.

"These were every day to start with, but now are roughly every week. I consider that the respondent has not done much to support me."

Tina Ranales-Cotos, Miss Watson's solicitor, told the tribunal: "The applicant's case is that she made it known almost immediately after the incident that she wanted to be reassured that she would not be working alone and that there would be a gate on the counter for security."

Mr Cooper said he had called in a design firm after the incident to look at shop layout and security.

He said his concerns had always been about Miss Watson's welfare and that he had sent her flowers and kept in touch with her following the attack. He said he was saddened when she resigned.

His solicitor, Mr Goldberg, said: "This is an emotionally charged case. The applicant said in evidence that she had never been told that she could never have a gate or work alone.

"The respondent provided full pay for the applicant instead of statutory sick pay.

"The applicant said she did not think she was being supported when, in fact, the view was that she was supported."

The tribunal reserved their decision until a later date