Mr. T Nixon v Burslem Snooker Hall Limited — 2025

Reserved judgment of a one-judge hearing at Stoke on Trent (hybrid). The claimant relied solely on alleged direct dismissal (not constructive dismissal). The tribunal applied the principles in Omar v Epping Forest District Citizens Advice [2023] EAT 132 to determine whether the claimant had been dismissed or had resigned on 5 November 2022.

The tribunal made findings that, after relations between the claimant and the new owner Mr Holness had deteriorated (over a perceived replacement being inducted, an unrepaid £150 loan and the claimant asking his partner to use the company cash and carry purchasing card without permission), the claimant resigned on 5 November 2022. Mr Holness asked the claimant if he was sure and the resignation was reconfirmed. Applying Omar, the tribunal found the words and conduct objectively constituted an immediate, seriously meant and 'really intended' resignation; later attempts by the claimant to retract were impermissible without the respondent's agreement (which was never given).

As the tribunal found the claimant resigned and was not dismissed, the unfair dismissal claim failed at the threshold and was dismissed without further consideration of the procedure or sanction. The redundancy payment claim had been withdrawn at a preliminary hearing as no redundancy situation existed.