Mr M Gore v Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council — 2023

Mr Gore was employed by Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council from 4 January 2016 and resigned with effect from 28 February 2022, with payment in lieu of notice running to 21 April 2022. The tribunal found that concerns about his workload and stress had been raised as early as May 2019, but that the respondent then moved from relatively light-touch management to a formal capability process in 2021 without sufficient informal supervision or clear explanation of the allegations. The tribunal accepted that the capability meeting of 24 February 2021 and the follow-up letter of 12 March 2021 left Mr Gore with the impression that he was being blamed without proper prior notice or adequate opportunity to respond.

The tribunal also found that the grievance process which followed his complaint of 22 March 2021 was handled with repeated delay. Mr Corrin did not interview Mr Gore before issuing the grievance outcome on 14 June 2021, the appeal took until 3 November 2021, and Mr Burnett’s response to the further questions was not sent until 10 February 2022. The tribunal accepted that the delay at each stage, together with the removal of Mr Gore from the workplace WhatsApp group without prior discussion, further undermined trust and confidence. It found that the cumulative effect of those matters, and in particular the final delay in dealing with the further questions, was the final straw which led to resignation.

Applying section 95(1)(c) ERA 1996, Western Excavating v Sharp, and the implied term of mutual trust and confidence, the tribunal held that Sefton’s conduct amounted to a fundamental breach of contract and that Mr Gore had resigned because of that breach. It also held that he had not affirmed the contract before resigning, because only a few weeks had elapsed after the delayed February 2022 response. The complaint of constructive unfair dismissal therefore succeeded, and the case was listed to proceed to a separate remedy hearing.