Mr Alexie Rudenko v Capital Staffing Services Limited — 2026

Mr David McKenzie resigned from Capital Staffing Services Limited on 8 April 2019 and brought an unfair dismissal claim on the basis that he was entitled to treat the resignation as a dismissal because of fundamental breaches of contract. The tribunal applied the constructive dismissal framework under section 95(1)(c) ERA 1996 and the agreed authorities, including the questions in Kaur, the implied term of trust and confidence in Malik, and the fairness approach in Buckland.

On commission, the tribunal held that the 1 October 2017 'Bonus Structure' letter meant 20% commission applied only to new packages introduced after that date. It rejected the Claimant's case that the higher rate also applied to packages introduced before 1 October 2017, noting that the letter did not say so and there was no later written confirmation or other supporting evidence. Although Mr Lee's audit identified accounting irregularities and duplicate or erroneous payments to the Claimant totalling £22,563, the tribunal found that the Claimant had provided no breakdown for his alleged unpaid commission figure of £32,022 and was not satisfied that a breach of contract was proved on the commission issue.

On trust and confidence, the tribunal accepted that Mr McHugh behaved badly on 31 January 2019, but found that the conduct was not likely to destroy or seriously damage the employment relationship. It also held that, even if that conduct had crossed the threshold, the Claimant affirmed the contract by accepting the apology, indicating soon afterwards that he was no longer upset and continuing to work through February and March 2019. The allegations about Mr McHugh's conduct towards other staff and the wider working environment were not sufficiently particularised or corroborated. The tribunal therefore found no express or implied breach of contract, held that the Claimant had not been dismissed, and dismissed the unfair dismissal claim. No remedy arose.