Constructive dismissal claim fails despite delays in return-to-work support
A medical secretary who resigned after a year-long sick leave for depression and anxiety lost her claims for constructive unfair dismissal and disability discrimination. The tribunal found the GP practice's delays, while not ideal, did not amount to a fundamental breach of contract.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #constructive-dismissal
- #disability-discrimination
- #depression-anxiety
- #medical-secretary
- #workload-stress
- #welfare-meeting-delay
- #covid-19-pandemic
Key facts
- The claimant worked as a medical secretary at a GP practice from 29 May 2018 until she resigned on 8 June 2020.
- She went off sick with stress and anxiety on 10 June 2019 and never returned to work.
- The respondents knew the claimant was disabled by depression, stress and anxiety from the welfare meeting on 8 August 2019.
- The welfare report was delayed by nearly two months due to an error by the external consultant.
- The respondents did not complete a risk assessment or finalise a return-to-work plan before the claimant resigned.
- The grievance investigation took four months, partly due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Timeline
-
Claimant started employment
Diane Coppell began working as a medical secretary at East Cowes Surgery, 25 hours per week.
-
First sickness absence
Claimant signed off with anxiety and stress until 6 January 2019.
-
Claimant left work unwell
Claimant became very unwell at work and left; she was signed off sick with stress and anxiety, later depression.
-
Welfare meeting
Welfare meeting held with external HR consultant; claimant attended with her brother.
-
Welfare report received
The welfare report, dated 14 August 2019, was finally received by the practice after a delay.
-
Dr Want emailed about return to work
Dr Want proposed an informal meeting to discuss a safe return, including reduced hours.
-
Claimant submitted grievance
Claimant submitted a formal grievance about lack of support and failure to facilitate return to work.
-
Claimant resigned
Claimant resigned with one month's notice, citing breach of trust and confidence and disability discrimination.
-
Grievance outcome sent
Grievance outcome not upheld; sent to claimant after her resignation.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the GP practice's failure to complete a risk assessment, provide timely support, and finalise a return-to-work plan amounted to a fundamental breach of contract (constructive dismissal) and whether it failed to make reasonable adjustments for the claimant's disability.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed both claims. On constructive dismissal, it found that while there were delays, the respondent had taken reasonable steps to engage with the claimant and had not acted in a way that was calculated or likely to destroy trust and confidence. The claimant had also affirmed the contract by continuing to engage after the alleged breaches. On disability discrimination, the tribunal held that the respondent did not know and could not reasonably have been expected to know that the claimant would be placed at a substantial disadvantage by the PCPs, and that the suggested adjustments were not reasonable in the circumstances.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers should ensure welfare reports and return-to-work plans are completed promptly, but delays alone may not amount to a fundamental breach of contract if the employer is actively engaging.
- Employees who continue to work or engage after a breach risk affirming the contract and losing the right to claim constructive dismissal.
- For a reasonable adjustments claim, the employer must know or ought to know that the employee is at a substantial disadvantage; vague suggestions of adjustments may not be enough.
- Constructive dismissal claims require a clear fundamental breach that causes the resignation; delays and poor communication may not meet this high threshold.
A case of delays but no breach
A medical secretary who worked 25 hours a week at a GP practice resigned after a year-long absence due to depression and anxiety. She claimed that the practice's failure to provide timely support, complete a risk assessment, and finalise a return-to-work plan amounted to constructive unfair dismissal and disability discrimination. The tribunal, however, found that while there were delays, the practice had not acted in a way that destroyed trust and confidence.
The claimant went off sick in June 2019 and never returned. A welfare meeting was held in August 2019, but the resulting report was delayed by nearly two months due to an error by an external consultant. The practice did not complete a risk assessment or finalise a return-to-work plan before the claimant resigned in June 2020. The tribunal acknowledged these delays but noted that the practice had made efforts to stay in contact and had proposed an informal meeting to discuss a return.
Why the claims failed
The tribunal found that the claimant had affirmed the contract by continuing to engage with the practice after the alleged breaches, including submitting a grievance and exchanging emails. This meant she could not claim constructive dismissal. On disability discrimination, the tribunal held that the practice did not know and could not reasonably have been expected to know that the claimant would be at a substantial disadvantage by the requirement to carry out her normal work activities. The suggested adjustments, such as paying her in full while off sick, were not considered reasonable in the circumstances.
What this means for similar cases
This case highlights the importance of timing and communication in constructive dismissal claims. Employees who wish to resign in response to a breach must do so promptly, without affirming the contract. For employers, the case shows that delays alone may not be fatal if there is genuine engagement. However, the outcome may have been different if the claimant had not continued to engage or if the practice had ignored her entirely. The decision also underscores that disability discrimination claims require clear evidence that the employer knew or should have known about the disadvantage and that the proposed adjustments were reasonable.
Similar cases
Constructive dismissal of midwife with dyspraxia over surprise criticism meeting
An antenatal education midwife with dyspraxia and depression was constructively dismissed after a manager raised multiple criticisms without warning. The tribunal upheld her unfair dismissal claim and one reasonable adjustment claim.
GP contacted without consent: constructive dismissal and disability harassment win
A former employee with depression and anxiety was constructively dismissed after her employer contacted her GP without permission. The tribunal awarded over £54,000.
Care worker resigned after 'so bipolar' comment and sudden role change: constructive dismissal claim allowed to proceed
A care assessment officer who was told she was 'so bipolar' and had her role changed with less than 24 hours' notice has been allowed to add protected disclosure claims to her constructive dismissal case.
Pharmacy technician's constructive dismissal claim fails after not sharing adjustment passport with new employer
A pharmacy dispensary technician with fibromyalgia and other conditions lost her constructive unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims after the tribunal found she did not share her adjustment passport with her new employer following a TUPE transfer.