A manager's disastrous mishandling of an application for flexible working, from an employee who had returned from maternity leave, meant that she resigned and successfully claimed constructive dismissal.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that the date of a conditional resignation cannot constitute the effective date of termination regardless of any agreement between the employer and employee.
In Buckland v Bournemouth University Higher Education Corporation [2010] EWCA Civ 121 CA, the Court of Appeal held that the "range of reasonable responses" test has no place in a tribunal's determination of whether or not there was a repudiatory breach of contract by the employer and constructive dismissal. It also held that such a breach cannot be "cured", so as to prevent the innocent party accepting the breach.
In Lyons v Mitie Security Ltd EAT/0081/09, the EAT held that, in principle, the ability to take annual leave is not inalienable and can be lost if the worker does not comply with the notice requirements imposed by the Working Time Regulations 1998 and/or the worker's contract. However, the tribunal had erred in failing to analyse properly whether or not the particular notice requirements of the claimant's contract had been complied with, before deciding to dismiss his constructive dismissal and holiday pay claims.
In Stuart Peters Ltd v Bell [2009] IRLR 941 CA, the Court of Appeal held that, in a case of constructive unfair dismissal, the Norton Tool principle that compensation for unfair dismissal without notice must include a sum representing the employee's full pay during his or her notice period does not apply, and the employee must give credit for any earnings during this period.