Mrs P Wills v West Grantham Academies Trust — 2019

Mrs Wills brought a single claim of constructive unfair dismissal under section 95(1)(c) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The tribunal set out the legal approach from Western Excavating ECC Limited v Sharp and Malik, including the need for a repudiatory breach, resignation in response to that breach, and no affirmation of the contract. It also recorded that the claim depended on both an express contractual term and the implied term of trust and confidence. The judge sat alone and refused the respondent's adjournment application before hearing the merits.

The tribunal found that Mrs Wills had been suspended from 19 January 2018 while allegations about safeguarding and an educational visits role were investigated. It held that the disciplinary process took too long: although the allegations were described as complex, Mrs Wills remained suspended for about six months without evidence that the suspension had been reviewed in light of the delay. The tribunal also found that the final written warning for the first allegation was too harsh when balanced against her long and unblemished service, the steps she had already taken with the police and safeguarding plan, and the surrounding circumstances.

After reinstatement, the tribunal found that no effective return-to-work discussion took place until 3 September 2018, that Mrs Wills was then given a different role description, and that she had been told her salary would be lower but not what it would be. It found that the Trust was in breach of the express terms of the contract by requiring her to work in a different role at a lower salary, and that the overall handling of matters after 19 January 2018 also breached the implied term of trust and confidence. Those were held to be repudiatory breaches.

The tribunal accepted that Mrs Wills resigned only three days after the 3 September meeting and that the breaches played a very significant role in her decision to resign. It rejected the argument that she had affirmed the contract by returning to work on 3 September or by pursuing an appeal. The claim of constructive unfair dismissal was therefore upheld. No remedy award is set out in this judgment.