Claimant v Towyn Development Co Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the claimant resigned rather than being dismissed. On 2 April 2024, the claimant made enquiries about his notice period during a telephone call with Mrs Bethan Parry, which she understood as a resignation and relayed to Mr Geraint Owen. On 3 April 2024, when Mr Owen asked the claimant about his notice, the claimant responded 'Yes I have', confirming his resignation. The claimant failed to respond to the respondent's letter of 4 April 2024 which confirmed his resignation, which was inconsistent with someone who had not resigned. The tribunal concluded objectively that the claimant had resigned and was not dismissed.
The parties agreed by consent that the claimant was entitled to 12 weeks statutory notice and would be paid 8 weeks, being the difference between the statutory notice period and the 4 weeks already paid.
The parties agreed by consent that the claimant was entitled to be paid for 8 days of holidays not taken and outstanding at the point of termination of his contract.
This claim was listed in the original claim but was not determined by the tribunal, as the tribunal found the claimant resigned rather than being dismissed, which would preclude entitlement to statutory redundancy pay.
Facts
The claimant, a farm worker with 26 years' service, claimed he was dismissed on 3 April 2024. The respondent contended he resigned. On 1 April 2024 (bank holiday Monday), the claimant attended work but was told by phone he should not be there. On 2 April 2024, the claimant telephoned Mrs Bethan Parry and made enquiries about his notice period, which she understood as a resignation. On 3 April 2024, Mr Geraint Owen approached the claimant about his notice, to which the claimant responded 'Yes I have'. The respondent sent a letter on 4 April 2024 confirming the claimant's resignation, to which the claimant did not respond.
Decision
The tribunal found that the claimant resigned rather than being dismissed. The tribunal preferred the respondent's evidence that on 3 April 2024 the claimant confirmed his resignation by saying 'Yes I have' when asked about his notice. The tribunal found it telling that the claimant did not respond to the respondent's letter of 4 April 2024 which would have been the reasonable action of someone who had not resigned. The unfair dismissal claim therefore failed, but the claimant succeeded on wrongful dismissal (notice pay) and holiday pay by consent.
Practical note
When there is a dispute about whether ambiguous words constitute resignation or dismissal, tribunals will apply an objective test considering all circumstances including subsequent conduct, and a failure to respond to a letter seeking clarification may support a finding of resignation.
Award breakdown
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6010083/2024
- Decision date
- 21 October 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- agriculture
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Farm Worker
- Service
- 26 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister