Case 8000961/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr F McBride v Greene King Retail Services Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 8000961/2025
- Decision date
- 2 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Doherty
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr F McBride
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, a project surveyor employed by the respondent from 3 May 2004 until 31 December 2024, brought claims of unfair dismissal and breach of contract. The respondent's position was that the claimant had resigned rather than been dismissed. The Tribunal found that the claimant's email of 10 July 2024 to his line manager, following a discussion the previous day, was a clear resignation formalising his intention to leave no later than 31 December 2024, and that this resignation was accepted by the respondent in writing on 11 July 2024 and 23 July 2024.
The Tribunal considered whether the claimant's later signature of new harmonised terms and conditions in September 2024 amounted to an express or implied agreement to revoke or vary the resignation. Applying Riordan v War Office [1958] 1 WLR 1046, Harris and Russell v Slingsby [1973] NIRC 454 and Butcher v Surrey County Council UKEAT/0022/19/LA, the Tribunal held that a resignation once given cannot be revoked or varied unilaterally. The new T&Cs were part of a workforce-wide harmonisation exercise, the claimant's continuity, salary and role were unchanged, and there was no conduct by the respondent capable of constituting a waiver of the resignation.
The Tribunal therefore concluded that the claimant's employment terminated by reason of his own resignation under s.95 ERA, so the unfair dismissal claim failed and was dismissed. The breach of contract claim, being contingent on a finding of dismissal without notice, also failed and was dismissed. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Tribunal concluded the claimant resigned on 10 July 2024 with an effective date of termination of 31 December 2024, and that there had been no express or implied agreement to waive or vary the resignation. As the claimant was not dismissed under s.95 ERA, the unfair dismissal claim failed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract (wrongful dismissal) claim was contingent on a finding that the claimant had been dismissed without notice. Having found that the claimant resigned, the Tribunal dismissed this claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- Section 95 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Section 98 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Section 111A Employment Rights Act 1996
- Riordan v War Office [1958] 1 WLR 1046
- Harris and Russell v Slingsby [1973] NIRC 454
- Butcher v Surrey County Council UKEAT/0022/19/LA
- Galilee v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2018] ICR 643
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.