Latest in Employment Law>Case Law>Avidor v Cambridge Steiner School [2021]
Avidor v Cambridge Steiner School [2021]
Published on: 15/12/2021
Issues Covered: Dismissal
Article Authors The main content of this article was provided by the following authors.
Jason Elliott BL Lecturer in Law and Barrister
Jason Elliott BL Lecturer in Law and Barrister

Jason Elliott was called to the Bar of Northern Ireland in 2013 and is the Associate Head of School of Law at Ulster University.  As a practising barrister, he has developed a largely civil practice representing individuals, companies and public bodies in litigation. This covers a wide range of areas including personal injuries, wills and employment law. In terms of employment law, he has represented both applicants and respondents in the Industrial Tribunal.   At Ulster University, Jason lectures extensively on the civil areas of practise such as Equity and Trusts and delivers employment law lectures for both undergraduate and postgraduate students.

Background

The claimant started working for the respondent originally as a Kitchen Supervisor in September 2017.  She resigned on 13th September 2019.   The claimant went on a period of maternity leave returning in May 2019.  On her return, there was a requirement for a finance role to be covered so she was asked to take on that role for approximately 15 hours per week with that increasing to 30 hours per week. 

The School was subject to an OFSTED which found that the school required improvement.   This required greater oversight of the financial duties and the financial role in the school was being expanded.   The post for this expanded role was not advertised yet the claimant was interviewed in August 2019.  She undertook this role at the start of September but there were issues remaining in relation to working from home due to childcare responsibilities.    

The claimant raised a number of issues before she had resigned.  This ranged from allegations against the Head Teacher making faces at her, needlessly correcting her use of English, cancelling parents’ meetings without telling the claimant, slamming the door in her face and individuals questioning the claimant’s role in the organisation.   This came to a head on 13th September when the claimant resigned by email to the Trustees and Head Teacher.  She cited that there was a ‘loss of trust’ and went on to thank some individuals for their assistance during her employment.  

The Tribunal examined these allegations against the law on constructive dismissal which requires a fundamental breach of an express or implied term of the contract of employment.   It was held that the Tribunal must take into account all of the circumstances.   This examined the fact that the Head Teacher was newly into the role and there were many issues to be resolved at the school.  It was found that there was a degree of confusion about the claimant’s role but considering that she had only just gone into it that it was expected and that it would likely have been resolved within the first few weeks.  As a result, it was found that the resignation was premature and it was not in response to a fundamental breach of contract.  Accordingly, there was no dismissal and the claim for constructive dismissal was rejected. 

Practical Lessons

This case demonstrates the law relating to constructive dismissal in action.  A series of smaller issues can lead to a fundamental breach of contract especially where it is the ‘final straw’.  However, the Tribunal clearly noted here that the threshold had not been overcome to show a fundamental breach of contract and that the resignation was ‘premature’.  It does demonstrate that there is a sliding scale and whilst the claimant may have been some way across that scale, there was still more required to make it a fundamental breach of contract.  
https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions/mrs-s-avidor-v-cambridge-steiner-school-3302379-slash-2020

Continue reading

We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact your business.

Already a subscriber?

Please log in to view the full article.

What you'll get:

  • Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
  • Ensure your organisation's policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
  • 24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
  • Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team

Already a subscriber? Log in now or start a free trial

Disclaimer The information in this article is provided as part of Legal Island's Employment Law Hub. We regret we are not able to respond to requests for specific legal or HR queries and recommend that professional advice is obtained before relying on information supplied anywhere within this article. This article is correct at 15/12/2021