Wine specialist's constructive dismissal claim fails: 'last straw' not a breach of trust
A former John Lewis wine department specialist with 8 years' service lost her constructive unfair dismissal claim after the tribunal found her resignation was driven by frustration with management style, not a breach of trust and confidence.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Key facts
- The claimant resigned on 13 October 2019 after working for the respondent since 11 September 2011.
- The claimant alleged a series of incidents culminating in a dispute with Lucie Mongellas on 21 July 2019 as the 'last straw'.
- The claimant did not specify the alleged breaches in her resignation email or in her initial claim details.
- The tribunal found that the real reason for resignation was frustration with management style, not a breach of trust and confidence.
- The claimant accepted she was ill-prepared for the hearing and had not sought legal advice.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began working for John Lewis at the John Barnes Swiss Cottage branch in the wine department.
-
Transferred to King's Cross
Claimant moved to the King's Cross branch to set up and run the wine department.
-
Removed from wine department
Claimant was removed from the wine department due to its lack of success and moved to the chilled food area.
-
Incidents with Shah and Abdi
Claimant reported two incidents with team leader Shah and one with night shift partner Abdi, but did not find them sufficiently serious.
-
Incident with Alan Bradley
Claimant had a disagreement with Alan Bradley about the 'it's on us' initiative, which she felt was humiliating.
-
Incident with Lucie Mongellas
Claimant was challenged by Lucie Mongellas about taking a break out of uniform; claimant considered this the 'last straw'.
-
Grievance lodged
Claimant lodged a formal grievance regarding the incidents with Bradley and Mongellas.
-
Grievance meeting
Claimant attended an investigatory meeting with Emma Anderson; felt frustrated by the outcome.
-
Resignation
Claimant resigned via email, giving two weeks' notice, without specifying reasons.
-
Employment ended
Effective date of termination of employment.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether a series of incidents, culminating in a dispute with a colleague, amounted to a fundamental breach of the implied term of trust and confidence, entitling the employee to resign and claim constructive dismissal.
The outcome
The tribunal found that the claimant was not constructively dismissed. The key reason was that the incidents she relied on, including the 'last straw' on 21 July 2019, did not amount to a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. The tribunal noted that the claimant had not specified the breaches in her resignation email or initial claim, and her real reason for resigning was frustration with management style.
No compensation was awarded as the claim failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- When resigning and claiming constructive dismissal, clearly state the breaches of contract in your resignation letter and claim form.
- The 'last straw' must be an act that contributes to a breach of trust and confidence, not just a minor disagreement.
- Delaying a claim can lead to strike-out applications; seek legal advice promptly.
- Frustration with management style alone is not enough for constructive dismissal – there must be a fundamental breach of contract.
What this case shows in practice
This case highlights the difficulty of proving constructive dismissal, especially when the employee does not clearly link their resignation to specific breaches of contract. The claimant, a wine department specialist with eight years' service, resigned after a series of incidents she described as the 'last straw'. However, the tribunal found that her real reason for leaving was frustration with management style, not a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence.
What the losing side could have done differently
The claimant represented herself and was ill-prepared for the hearing. She had not specified the alleged breaches in her resignation email or initial claim, which weakened her case. The tribunal noted that she had been 'misinformed' by ACAS about the process. Seeking legal advice early could have helped her understand the need to clearly identify the breaches and gather evidence.
Why the result matters for similar claims
This decision reinforces that constructive dismissal claims require a clear causal link between a fundamental breach of contract and the resignation. Employees should document incidents, raise grievances formally, and ensure the 'last straw' is a genuine breach, not just a workplace disagreement. The case also serves as a reminder that tribunals will scrutinise the timing and specificity of the claim.
Similar cases
Area manager's constructive dismissal claim fails after resignation by email
An area manager with 8 years' service resigned by email after his grievance was rejected. The tribunal found he was not constructively dismissed because the employer's conduct did not amount to a fundamental breach of trust and confidence.
PWE sign-off delay: resignation over unauthorised absence meeting was not constructive dismissal
A graduate trainee accountant who resigned after being invited to a disciplinary meeting for unauthorised absence failed to prove constructive unfair dismissal. The tribunal found the employer's conduct did not breach trust and confidence.
Support Manager's constructive dismissal claim over role change fails
A Support Manager who resigned after her role was changed and workload reduced lost her constructive unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal found no breach of trust and confidence.
Business manager's constructive dismissal claim fails over PIP process
A business manager with 8 years' service resigned after being invited to a second disciplinary hearing for underperformance. The tribunal found no breach of trust and confidence and dismissed his constructive unfair dismissal claim.