Mr Ayodele Martin v London Borough of Southwark and 2 others — 2020

At an open preliminary hearing, the Tribunal considered the correct identity of the respondents, the redundancy payment claim, the unlawful deductions claim, the timing of the constructive unfair dismissal claim, and whether the protected disclosure claims should continue. Both respondents were included, the redundancy payment claim was withdrawn and dismissed on that basis, and the strike-out or deposit application concerning unlawful deductions was withdrawn pending the claimant's decision on whether that claim continued.

The Tribunal found that the claimant's resignation email of 17 December 2019 was unambiguous and unequivocal. It held that the claimant had communicated that he was resigning in response to alleged fundamental breaches of contract and that his effective date of termination was 17 December 2019. The constructive unfair dismissal claim was therefore presented two days out of time, but a further preliminary hearing was ordered to decide whether it had been reasonably practicable to present it in time and whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction.

On protected disclosures, the Tribunal found that the current allegations either mirrored previous proceedings, were too imprecise to determine, or concerned matters the claimant knew about and could have included in the earlier claims. Applying the authorities on estoppel and abuse of process, it struck out the protected disclosure claims as res judicata/an abuse of process.