IT professional's constructive dismissal claim fails after affirming contract
An IT professional who resigned claiming breach of trust and confidence lost his constructive unfair dismissal case. The tribunal found he had affirmed the contract by continuing to work for months after the alleged 'last straw'.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #constructive-dismissal
- #implied-term-trust-and-confidence
- #last-straw
- #affirmation
- #checkpoint-tool
- #role-transition-delay
- #management-feedback
Key facts
- The claimant was an IT professional employed as a Security Consultant.
- The respondent was undergoing a major reorganisation after spinning off from IBM.
- The claimant applied for and was offered a new security role but the move was delayed for several months.
- The claimant raised concerns about management feedback, Checkpoint tool responses, and the delay in moving roles.
- The claimant resigned on 22 February 2022, citing a breach of trust and confidence.
- The tribunal found that the respondent's conduct did not amount to a repudiatory breach of contract.
Timeline
-
Performance review feedback
Mr Kirkpatrick gave the claimant feedback about a phone call where he argued in front of customers. The claimant felt this was unfair but the tribunal found it was legitimate management feedback.
-
Phone call feedback
Mr Kirkpatrick called the claimant about a complaint regarding his behaviour on a client call. The claimant felt reprimanded, but the tribunal found it was a learning point, not a reprimand.
-
Checkpoint questions raised
The claimant posted questions on the Checkpoint tool about his role and career development. Mr Kirkpatrick responded by email on 16 August, but the claimant felt the response was insufficient.
-
Claimant informs manager of intention to move roles
The claimant told Mr Kirkpatrick he wanted to move to a new security role. Mr Martin advised him to stay for a better opportunity in the new security practice.
-
Complaint from colleague
A colleague complained about the claimant's behaviour. Mr Kirkpatrick supported the claimant but escalated the matter to Mr Martin.
-
Phone call with Mr Martin
Mr Martin called the claimant to discuss the complaint and the claimant's handling of a project. The claimant felt bullied, but the tribunal found it was a management meeting with constructive criticism.
-
Team-wide email from Mr Martin
Mr Martin sent an email referencing two complaints about the claimant without naming him. The claimant was upset, but Mr Martin later apologised.
-
Claimant emails about Checkpoint
The claimant emailed Mr Kirkpatrick about unanswered Checkpoint questions. Mr Kirkpatrick replied the same day, but the claimant considered the reply insufficient.
-
Claimant resigns
The claimant resigned with one month's notice, citing a breach of trust and confidence. He had obtained another job offer.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employer's actions—including management feedback, delays in role transition, and responses to internal queries—amounted to a breach of trust and confidence that justified the employee resigning and claiming constructive unfair dismissal.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claim of constructive unfair dismissal.
Key reasons:
- The management feedback was legitimate and not bullying.
- The delay in moving to a new role was due to reorganisation, not a breach of contract.
- The claimant affirmed the contract by continuing to work for several months after the alleged 'last straw'.
No compensation was awarded as the claim failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- If you continue working for a significant period after an alleged breach, you may be deemed to have accepted the contract and lose the right to claim constructive dismissal.
- Constructive dismissal claims require a repudiatory breach—management feedback and delays that are reasonable in context may not qualify.
- Keep a clear record of any incidents you believe breach trust and confidence, and consider resigning promptly if you intend to rely on them.
- Internal reorganisations can cause delays in role transitions, but these are not automatically a breach of contract.
When continuing to work can undermine a constructive dismissal claim
This case illustrates a common pitfall for employees considering a constructive dismissal claim: the risk of 'affirmation'. The IT professional, a Security Consultant with over five years' service, resigned in February 2022 citing a series of incidents that he said destroyed trust and confidence. But the tribunal found that by continuing to work for months after the last of those incidents, he had accepted the contract and lost the right to claim constructive dismissal.
What the employer did right
Kyndryl UK Ltd, a large technology company undergoing a major reorganisation after spinning off from IBM, was able to show that its actions were reasonable. The feedback given to the employee about client calls and a colleague complaint was legitimate management, not bullying. The delay in moving him to a new security role—around seven months—was due to the reorganisation, not a deliberate snub. And the responses to his queries on the internal 'Checkpoint' tool, while perhaps not as detailed as he wanted, were not a breach of contract.
The 'last straw' that wasn't
The employee argued that a team-wide email from his second-line manager in December 2021, which referenced complaints about him without naming him, was the final straw. But the manager apologised, and the tribunal noted the employee continued to work for another two months before resigning—and had already lined up another job. That delay, combined with the fact that he had raised grievances and continued to engage with the process, meant he had affirmed the contract.
What this means for similar claims
For employees, the key lesson is timing: if you believe your employer has fundamentally broken your contract, you need to resign promptly—or at least make it clear you are working under protest. Continuing to work for months while pursuing internal processes can be seen as acceptance. For employers, the case shows that clear, reasonable management feedback and transparent communication about organisational changes can help defend against constructive dismissal claims.
Similar cases
Furloughed to block server access: when a breach of trust isn't enough for constructive dismissal
A design technician lost his constructive unfair dismissal claim after the tribunal found that being placed on furlough to prevent server access was a breach of trust, but not serious enough to justify resignation.
Operations manager resigns after duties removed: constructive dismissal claim succeeds
An operations manager with 8 years' service was constructively dismissed after the church removed his communications duties and excluded him from key decisions. The tribunal awarded £11,009.77.
Constructive dismissal claim over Covid-19 return to work fails
A project management team member resigned claiming constructive dismissal after being required to work on site during lockdowns. The tribunal found the employer's actions were reasonable management instructions and dismissed the claim.
Constructive dismissal claim fails after employee stayed five months after last straw
A case management clerk who resigned five months after the alleged final straw was found to have affirmed her contract, losing her constructive dismissal claim against Birmingham City Council.