Mr Andrew John v Secarma Limited — 2023

Mr Andrew John was employed as Secarma Limited's Chief Technical Officer from 12 November 2018. The appointment letter said the role was to join the board as CTO, and the tribunal found that this was the clear intention of Mr Jones when offering the role, although the appointment was never formalised and others in the business were not told he was to be treated as a board member. The tribunal found that this background explained much of the later tension about authority and reporting lines, but the claimant was unaware during his employment that the board appointment had not in fact been completed.

On 15 July 2020 the claimant was suspended during an investigation into complaints raised by Holly Grace Williams. The tribunal rejected most of the alleged breaches relied on by the claimant as part of the constructive dismissal case, including the suspension itself, the explanation given in the suspension letter, the reassignment of his direct reports, the grievance handling points he raised, and the use of an independent investigator. It held that those matters, viewed in context, did not in themselves amount to repudiatory breaches of contract.

The tribunal nevertheless found a course of conduct that did amount to a fundamental breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. In particular, it found that the respondent made staff redundant and informed them that the Cheltenham office was closing on the day of the claimant's suspension without involving him, later abandoned the external investigation without telling him, allowed Mr Ryland to act as disciplinary officer despite his earlier involvement as a witness, and issued a final written warning without a hearing on the claimant's full case. The tribunal also found that the final letter of 20 January 2021, together with the failure to pay full sick pay from 11 January 2021, formed the final straw. The claimant resigned on 1 February 2021, did not affirm the breaches, and was found to have been unfairly dismissed by way of constructive dismissal. Liability was decided in this judgment only; a remedy hearing was listed for 4 April 2023.