Claimant v Oliveto & Olivo Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the claimant resigned on 25 January 2024 when he stated multiple times during a Zoom meeting that he had no intention of returning to work for the respondent. The tribunal held that, viewed objectively, a reasonable bystander would have understood these statements as a resignation. The claimant was not dismissed by the employer.
The tribunal found that the alleged breaches (criticism after the fire, alleged criticism for bereavement leave, and offer of alternative role) did not cumulatively amount to a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. The respondent's conduct was not calculated or likely to destroy or seriously damage the relationship of trust and confidence, and the respondent had proper cause for its actions in attempting to redeploy the claimant after the fire.
Facts
The claimant was a long-serving Head Chef at an Italian restaurant which was destroyed by fire on 18 June 2023. His brother had died days earlier and he was bereaved and subsequently depressed. The respondent offered him alternative roles as Pasta Chef and Head Chef at other restaurants, which he did not accept. He remained on sick leave for seven months. At a Zoom meeting on 25 January 2024, he stated he did not wish to return to work for the respondent. The respondent treated this as resignation with 12 weeks' notice.
Decision
The tribunal found that the claimant resigned on 25 January 2024 when he clearly stated he had no intention of returning to work. Viewed objectively, a reasonable bystander would have understood his words as resignation. The tribunal also rejected the alternative constructive dismissal claim, finding the respondent's actions did not cumulatively breach the implied term of trust and confidence. The respondent had proper cause for its conduct in trying to redeploy the claimant after the fire closed his workplace.
Practical note
Clear and unambiguous statements by an employee that they do not intend to return to work will be objectively assessed as resignation, even where expressed during ongoing sickness absence and without using the word 'resign'.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6008669/2024
- Decision date
- 21 July 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- hospitality
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Head Chef
- Salary band
- £15,000–£20,000
- Service
- 20 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep