Gillespie v R and M Greenkeeper Ltd [2015] NIIT 2374_14IT (28 April 2015)

Gillespie v R and M Greenkeeper Ltd [2015] NIIT 2374_14IT (28 April 2015)

The respondent did not commit a fundamental breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. The claimant accepted the variation regarding the essential car user allowance, and the failure to provide the SSP1 form was a one-off, inadvertent statutory breach without knowledge or request, not amounting to a repudiatory breach. The cumulative effect of the respondent's actions did not amount to a fundamental breach of contract entitling the claimant to resign. The claim for constructive unfair dismissal is dismissed.

Citation
[2015] NIIT 2374_14IT
Parties
Claimant: Claimant; Respondent: Respondent
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
28 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Employment Tribunal Constructive Dismissal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Constructive Dismissal, Implied Term of Trust and Confidence, Repudiatory Breach, Unlawful Deduction of Wages, Statutory Duty Breach
Employment Law Constructive Dismissal Implied Term of Trust and Confidence Repudiatory Breach Unlawful Deduction of Wages Statutory Duty Breach

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Claimant

Claimant

Respondent

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Tribunal Constructive Dismissal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent committed a fundamental breach of contract entitling the claimant to resign (constructive dismissal)
  2. 2 Whether the withdrawal of the essential car user allowance constituted a repudiatory breach of contract
  3. 3 Whether failure to provide the SSP1 form was a breach of contract

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent did not commit a fundamental breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. The claimant accepted the variation regarding the essential car user allowance, and the failure to provide the SSP1 form was a one-off, inadvertent statutory breach without knowledge or request, not amounting to a repudiatory breach. The cumulative effect of the respondent's actions did not amount to a fundamental breach of contract entitling the claimant to resign. The claim for constructive unfair dismissal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • The claimant's claim of constructive unfair dismissal is dismissed.
  • The claimant's claim of unlawful deduction of wages is dismissed.