Claimant v Tillicoultry Quarries Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the claimant was not constructively dismissed for the purposes of section 95(1)(c) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The respondent had not committed a fundamental breach of contract that entitled the claimant to resign and treat themselves as dismissed.
The complaint of constructive unfair dismissal was not well-founded and was dismissed. Since the tribunal concluded there was no constructive dismissal, there could be no unfair dismissal claim.
Facts
Mr D Sneddon brought a claim for constructive unfair dismissal against Tillicoultry Quarries Limited. The case was heard over two days in Glasgow. The claimant was represented by his son as a lay representative, while the respondent was represented by a solicitor. Oral reasons were given at the end of the hearing.
Decision
The tribunal found that the claimant was not constructively dismissed under section 95(1)(c) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Consequently, the complaint of constructive unfair dismissal was not well-founded and was dismissed.
Practical note
A claimant must establish that the employer committed a fundamental breach of contract to succeed in a constructive dismissal claim under section 95(1)(c) ERA 1996.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 8001933/2024
- Decision date
- 3 April 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- construction
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep