Holland v Glendale Industries Ltd [1998] UKEAT 903_97_1405 (14 May 1998)
The applicant was not entitled to succeed in his claim for constructive dismissal because he did not make clear to his employer a reason for leaving consistent with constructive dismissal, as required by binding precedent and principles of contract law.
- Citation
- [1998] UKEAT 903_97_1405
- Parties
- Appellant: Applicant (Appellant); Respondent: Respondents
- Jurisdiction
- United Kingdom
- Judgment Date
- 14 May 1998
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Appeal / Appeal and Cross Appeal From Industrial Tribunal
- Outcome
- appeal and cross-appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Constructive Dismissal, Fundamental Breach of Contract, Termination of Employment, Affirmation, Repudiation
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Applicant (Appellant)
Appellant
Respondents
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal and Cross Appeal From Industrial Tribunal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant was constructively dismissed
- 2 Whether the applicant made clear to the employer the reason for leaving consistent with constructive dismissal
- 3 Whether the respondents' conduct amounted to fundamental breach of contract
Ratio Decidendi
The applicant was not entitled to succeed in his claim for constructive dismissal because he did not make clear to his employer a reason for leaving consistent with constructive dismissal, as required by binding precedent and principles of contract law.
Court Disposition
appeal and cross-appeal dismissed
Orders
- Applicant's claim for constructive dismissal fails
- Cross-appeal by respondents dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment