EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL: Dismissal/ambiguous resignation
JURISDICTIONAL POINTS: Claim in time and effective date of termination
The Claimant claimed unfair direct dismissal and constructive dismissal and unlawful deductions. The ET at a PHR dismissed (with costs) his unfair dismissal claims on the grounds that the Claimant had not been dismissed and were, in any event, out of time. He had been dismissed for misconduct, on appeal, demotion was substituted for dismissal; but the Respondents could only demote if the Claimant agreed. He was directed to work in the demoted post – which he did under protest, before leaving. His first ET1 was not accepted by the Employment Tribunal on the ground that he had not satisfied the Dispute Resolution requirements; he did so and presented a second ET1.
Held
(1) (i) The provision that demotion could only take place with the Claimant’s agreement had the effect that, absent such agreement, this was not a Roberts v West Coast Trains type case but was closer to Hogg v Dover College (ii) the finding that the claimant had agreed was perverse (iii) therefore he had been dismissed.
(2) The second claim was not out of time; time was extended by Regulation 15 of the Dispute Resolution Regulations.
(3) The Employment Judge had omitted in any event to deal with the Claimant’s constructive dismissal claim based on his assertion that the entire disciplinary process was a sham.
Appeal allowed. Case remitted to the Employment Tribunal to hear on merits.
Citations:
[2008] UKEAT 0018 – 08 – 0707
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.277400
