Constructive dismissal claim dismissed but costs refused: a case with some prospects
A former employee's claim for constructive unfair dismissal against Humberside Fire and Rescue Services was dismissed. The tribunal also refused the employer's costs application, finding the claim had some prospects of success.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant resigned and claimed constructive unfair dismissal.
- The claimant had obtained a conditional offer of employment elsewhere and informed colleagues he intended to leave.
- The tribunal found the respondent's conduct did not amount to a repudiatory breach of contract.
- The claimant's claim was dismissed as not well founded.
- The respondent's application for costs was refused because the claim had some prospects of success.
Timeline
-
Original agreed end date for police project
The claimant had originally agreed to work for Humberside police until this date to finalise a project.
-
Claim form issued
The claimant made a claim for constructive unfair dismissal against the respondent.
-
Final hearing day 1
The final hearing commenced at Hull Employment Tribunal, with witness evidence heard.
-
Final hearing day 2 and judgment
The hearing concluded and the tribunal dismissed the claimant's claim for constructive unfair dismissal.
-
Respondent's costs application
The respondent applied for costs in the sum of £16,135.48, arguing the claim had no reasonable prospects of success.
-
Claimant's response to costs application
The claimant responded, stating he believed his claim was genuine and he could not afford to pay costs.
-
Claimant's further submission
The claimant reiterated his belief in his case and provided details of his means.
-
Costs judgment
Employment Judge Flanagan refused the respondent's costs application, finding the claim had some prospects of success.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employer's actions — including not extending a police project, reducing workload, excluding from meetings, and denying promotion opportunities — breached the implied term of trust and confidence, entitling the employee to resign and claim constructive unfair dismissal.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claim for constructive unfair dismissal, finding that the employer's conduct did not amount to a repudiatory breach of contract. The claimant had also obtained a conditional offer of employment elsewhere and told colleagues he intended to leave, which undermined his case.
The respondent applied for costs of £16,135.48, arguing the claim had no reasonable prospects. However, the tribunal refused the application, noting that the claim had some prospects of success and the claimant had acted in good faith as a litigant in person.
Lessons & takeaways
- To succeed in a constructive dismissal claim, you must show your employer committed a fundamental breach of contract that made it reasonable for you to resign.
- If you have already secured another job and told colleagues you plan to leave, it can weaken your claim that the employer's conduct forced you to resign.
- Even if your claim is dismissed, the tribunal may refuse the employer's costs application if your case had some prospects of success and you acted reasonably.
This case shows the high bar for constructive unfair dismissal claims. The former employee resigned after a series of workplace issues, including a reduced workload and exclusion from meetings. But the tribunal found these did not amount to a fundamental breach of the trust and confidence implied in every employment contract.
A key factor was that the employee had already obtained a conditional job offer and told colleagues he planned to leave. This suggested his resignation was not solely driven by the employer's conduct. Employers facing such claims should ensure their actions are proportionate and justified, but this case shows that not every management decision will cross the line into a repudiatory breach.
Costs application refused
After the claim was dismissed, the employer sought over £16,000 in costs, arguing the case had no reasonable prospects. However, the tribunal refused, noting that while the claim ultimately failed, it was not hopeless from the start. The employee had represented himself and genuinely believed he had a case. This is a reminder that costs are not automatically awarded to the winning side, especially where the losing party acted in good faith.
For employees considering a constructive dismissal claim, the lesson is clear: you need clear evidence of a serious breach that left you no choice but to resign. For employers, even a successful defence does not guarantee you will recover your legal costs.
Similar cases
General Manager's constructive dismissal claim fails but holiday pay awarded
A General Manager with 13 years' service resigned claiming constructive dismissal after a dispute over a promised reward for a business sale. The tribunal rejected his claim but awarded £326.41 in unpaid holiday pay.
Dental lab manager wins constructive dismissal after hours cut without consultation
A dental lab manager with nine years' service was constructively unfairly dismissed after his employer cut his hours from 43 to 18 per week without any consultation. The tribunal found the employer's conduct amounted to a repudiatory breach of contract.
Whistleblowing claim struck out: when the disclosure comes too late
Two warehouse operatives had their automatic unfair dismissal claims for whistleblowing struck out because the alleged breaches happened before they made their protected disclosure. The tribunal said the claims had no reasonable prospects of success.
Out-of-office email not a 'final straw' for constructive dismissal claim
A BSL communicator with 12 years' service lost her constructive dismissal claim after the tribunal found that an out-of-office reply, which delayed her grievance appeal outcome, was not a breach of trust and confidence.