Claimant v Advisory Insurance Brokers Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the claimant resigned of her own volition after securing a new job, not because of any fundamental breach of contract by the respondent. The respondent's conduct in failing to replace the PA and the oversight in not responding to questions about restructuring did not meet the high threshold of the Malik test to constitute a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. The conduct was neither calculated nor likely to destroy or seriously damage trust and confidence.
Facts
The claimant was employed as an Executive Assistant from June 2018 to August 2023. From November 2022, she covered a part-time PA role after that colleague left, with no replacement recruited for nine months. In June 2023, a restructure created a new Team Leader role which the claimant was interested in, but she alleged the recruitment process was handled poorly with HR failing to answer her questions. The claimant secured a new job on 28 July 2023 and resigned on 1 August 2023, citing both the PA cover issue and the restructuring process.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the constructive dismissal claim, finding the claimant resigned voluntarily after securing new employment, not because of any fundamental breach of contract. The respondent's conduct in failing to replace the PA and the HR oversight in not responding to questions did not meet the Malik test threshold for breaching the implied term of trust and confidence. The conduct was neither calculated nor objectively likely to destroy or seriously damage the employment relationship.
Practical note
An employee's genuine frustration with employer inefficiency and poor HR communication does not automatically constitute a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence; the Malik test sets a high threshold requiring conduct that is calculated or objectively likely to destroy or seriously damage the employment relationship, and securing alternative employment before resigning may indicate the resignation was voluntary rather than constructive dismissal.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1406352/2023
- Decision date
- 22 June 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- financial services
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Executive Assistant
- Service
- 5 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No