Claimant v Gigaclear Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found no fundamental breach of contract. The claimant resigned to avoid a disciplinary process relating to serious misconduct (helping employees move to a competitor and lying about it). The respondent's actions in investigating the misconduct and continuing the disciplinary process, even while the claimant was off sick, were reasonable and not in breach of the implied term of trust and confidence.
The claimant gave notice and worked out her notice period. There was no dismissal and therefore no wrongful dismissal.
Although the claimant was disabled (anxiety), the respondent did not know this until after the events and could not reasonably have known. The actions taken (investigation meeting, disciplinary process) were because of suspected gross misconduct, not the claimant's disability. There was no causal link between the disability and the treatment.
The claimant originally brought whistleblowing detriment claims but abandoned them before the hearing.
The claimant originally brought victimisation claims based on whistleblowing but abandoned them before the hearing.
Facts
The claimant was a Contract Performance Manager who was found to have exchanged WhatsApp messages with a colleague, offering to help team members secure interviews with a competitor company and stating she would then resign herself. She was invited to an investigation meeting on her return from holiday without prior notice of the purpose. The next day she went off sick with anxiety. She resigned four days later when invited to a disciplinary hearing, stating her mental health prevented her from engaging with the process. She later tried to retract her resignation but the respondent refused.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed all claims. The constructive dismissal claim failed because the respondent's actions did not breach the implied term of trust and confidence; the claimant resigned to avoid facing disciplinary proceedings for serious misconduct. The wrongful dismissal claim failed because the claimant gave and worked her notice. The direct disability discrimination claim failed because the respondent did not know the claimant was disabled and the treatment was due to suspected misconduct, not her disability.
Practical note
An employer does not commit a fundamental breach of contract by proceeding with a disciplinary investigation while an employee is off sick with anxiety, where the employer lacks knowledge of disability and the employee has committed serious misconduct including lying in the investigation.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3300124/2023
- Decision date
- 28 March 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 4
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- telecoms
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Contract Performance Manager
- Service
- 3 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep