The court considered a claim for constructive dismissal where the parties made a genuine mistake as to the test for anticipatory breach.
Held: Sir John Donaldson MR said: ‘But, for my part, I would not have thought it necessary to give any particular time to this point because the essential features of a claim for constructive [dismissal] are two-fold; first, that the conduct of the employer relied upon must be such as to amount to a repudiation by him of the contract of service: it has to be, in popular language, expulsive conduct – to the lawyer repudiatory conduct; and, second, that the employee has left because of that conduct. The mere fact that a party to a contract takes a view of its construction which is ultimately shown to be wrong, does not of itself constitute repudiatory conduct. It has to be shown that he did not intend to be bound by the contract as properly construed. There is no finding by the Industrial Tribunal that that was the case here.’
Judges:
Sir John Donaldson MR
Citations:
[1987] IRLR 58
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Woodar Investment Development Ltd v Wimpey Construction UK Ltd HL 14-Feb-1980
Wimpey agreed to buy land from Woodar for a sum of andpound;850,000 of which andpound;150,000 was to be paid to Transworld. A month later Wimpey sent a letter purporting to rescind the contract and Woodar sued for damages including the . .
Cited – Financial Techniques (Planning Services) Ltd v Hughes CA 1981
A genuine dispute as to wages owed will not necessarily amount to a repudiatory breach of contract on the part of the employer. . .
Cited by:
Cited – Haberdasher’s Monmount School for Girls v Turner EAT 8-Mar-2004
EAT Unfair Dismissal
ET incorrectly applied Sir John Donaldson’s dictum in Bridgen [1987] IRLR 58 (based on Woodar v Wimpey): assertion of wrong interpretation of contract not enough for repudiation, which . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 22 August 2022; Ref: scu.416730
