Mr Smith v The Chief Constable Of Merseyside Police — 2021

The claimant resigned on notice on 30 December 2019 and his employment ended on 16 March 2020. He brought a single complaint of constructive unfair dismissal, relying on alleged breaches of the implied term of trust and confidence. The tribunal identified the most recent act relied on as the claimant's discovery on 25 November 2019 that Mr Aindow was responsible for the leak to the Liverpool Echo, together with the upset the claimant said this caused him.

The tribunal found that the claimant had not affirmed the contract after that act because he resigned within a reasonable period, but held that being told the identity of the leaker was not itself calculated or likely to destroy or seriously damage trust and confidence. The claimant had known for years that another employee had leaked the information, the leaker had left the respondent's employment about six years earlier, and the claimant was given the name when he asked for it.

The tribunal also rejected the alleged cumulative breach. It found that the 2010-2011 disciplinary proceedings were generally carried out in a fair and reasonable manner, that the data used in them was not used unlawfully, and that the respondent's approach to the Liverpool Echo leak was in principle reasonable and appropriate because it investigated, identified the leaker and dismissed him. It found insufficient connection between the 2011-2013 matters, the lack of complaint between 2013 and 2019, and the 2019 correspondence to amount to a course of conduct, and in any event found that the 2019 conduct of Mr Webster and Mr O'Mahoney was reasonable and appropriate.

The tribunal concluded that there was no breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. The claimant was therefore not constructively dismissed, and his unfair dismissal claim failed and was dismissed. No remedy was awarded.