Where an employee gives an unequivocal and unambiguous notice of his resignation, then that can be accepted by an employer and there is no dismissal. Where the unambiguous words are said in a moment of anger or in the heat of the moment or where there is mental incapacity on the part of the employee or a disability of some kind, there is a duty on the employer not to accept such a resignation too readily, but to check clearly that that is the true intention of the employee and to inquire when matters are clearer and calmer. A resignation given in heat or in a state of emotional stress or as a result of being jostled into a decision by the employer, may be withdrawn, but if the words of resignation are unambiguous that is the end of the matter.
Fox LJ said: ‘At the meeting on 8 November Mrs Sothern said ‘I am resigning’. The essential question in the case is the meaning to the given to those words. Are they ambiguous or are they unambiguous? The Industrial Tribunal, as I have mentioned, held that if the words constituted a resignation in unambiguous terms that was the end of the matter. That must be correct.’ and ‘. . The natural meaning of the words and the fact that the employers understood them to mean that the employee was resigning cannot be overridden by appeals to what a reasonable employer might have assumed. The non-disclosed intention of a person using language as to his intended meaning is not properly to be taken into account in determining what the true meaning is. That was the actual decision of the tribunal in Gale v Gilbert and in my view it was correct.’
He accepted that there might be exceptions: ‘Secondly, this is not a case of an immature employee, or of a decision taken in the heat of the moment, or of an employee being jostled into a decision by the employers.’
Judges:
Fox LJ
Citations:
[1981] IRLR 278
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Kwik-Fit (GB) Ltd v Lineham EAT 5-Feb-1992
The applicant claimed unfair dismissal. The employer replied that the employee had resigned.
Held: The employer’s appeal was dismissed. The resignation had taken place in a heated moment, and it was not conclusive. An employer may not be able . .
Cited – Ali v Birmingham City Council EAT 27-Oct-2008
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL: Dismissal/ambiguous resignation
1. The claimant handed in a letter of resignation to the respondents and he was then given a period of about 30 minutes to reconsider his decision.
Cited – Greater Glasgow Health Board v Mackay SCS 1989
The Court was asked to consider whether an employee, who wrote out a letter of resignation, had actually resigned in the light of the special state of anxiety of the employee when he wrote that letter.
Held: Lord Wylie said: ‘where possible . .
Cited – Willoughby v C F Capital Plc EAT 13-Jul-2010
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Dismissal/ambiguous resignation
Whether employee was dismissed – unambiguous words of dismissal used by employer – Tribunal erred in law in holding that by reason of ‘special . .
Cited – Barclay v Glasgow District Council 1983
B who was mentally disabled, worked cleaning up swing-parks. There was an altercation with the District Manager and the Foreman which ended by Mr Barclay saying that he wanted his books ‘the next day.’ The next day was a pay day and the manager gave . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 20 April 2022; Ref: scu.251733
