Dr Kate Barry v Upper Thames Medical Group & Ors

Dr Kate Barry v Upper Thames Medical Group & Ors

The Employment Tribunal erred in law by failing to take into account material factors pointing against affirmation, including ongoing dispute, lack of pay, and negotiation attempts. The claimant had not affirmed her contract prior to resignation; therefore, she was unfairly dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: Dr Kate Barry; Respondent: Upper Thames Medical Group; Respondent: Dr Julian Tallon; Respondent: Dr Timothy Wakeford; Respondent: Dr Joscelyn Myles; Respondent: Dr Amy Howarth; Respondent: Dr Caroline Maxwell
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 April 2025
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed; decision of unfair dismissal substituted
Legal Topics
Constructive Dismissal, Affirmation of Contract, Repudiatory Breach, Contractual Sick Pay
Employment Law Constructive Dismissal Affirmation of Contract Repudiatory Breach Contractual Sick Pay

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Kate Barry

Appellant

Upper Thames Medical Group

Respondent

Dr Julian Tallon

Respondent

Dr Timothy Wakeford

Respondent

Dr Joscelyn Myles

Respondent

Dr Amy Howarth

Respondent

Dr Caroline Maxwell

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant affirmed her contract of employment before resigning in response to the respondents’ repudiatory breach
  2. 2 Whether delay in resignation constituted affirmation
  3. 3 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in law by failing to consider relevant factors in finding affirmation

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal erred in law by failing to take into account material factors pointing against affirmation, including ongoing dispute, lack of pay, and negotiation attempts. The claimant had not affirmed her contract prior to resignation; therefore, she was unfairly dismissed.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; decision of unfair dismissal substituted

Orders

  • Decision that claimant was unfairly dismissed is substituted for that of the Employment Tribunal
  • Matter remitted to the same Employment Tribunal to determine remedy unless impracticable