Nurse's constructive dismissal claim struck out after NHS restructure
A former Grade 7 nurse failed to prove constructive unfair dismissal after his role was removed in a restructure. The tribunal struck out his claim and refused to add a disability discrimination claim.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was a Grade 7 nurse in the cardiovascular health and rehabilitation department.
- The respondent restructured the department, reducing the need for Grade 7 nurses to one.
- The claimant was removed from his role following a competitive interview process.
- The claimant was offered an alternative ward-based role on AMU with adjustments recommended by occupational health.
- The claimant resigned in July 2022, several months after the role change.
- The claimant applied to amend his claim to add a disability discrimination claim, which was refused.
Timeline
-
Organisational change concluded
The respondent's restructuring process ended, removing the claimant from his Grade 7 nurse role.
-
Letter explaining removal
The respondent sent a letter detailing the reasons for the claimant's removal from his role.
-
Occupational health report
An OH report stated the claimant could perform an alternative ward-based role on AMU with adjustments.
-
Claimant resigned
The claimant resigned, later claiming constructive unfair dismissal.
-
Hearing and judgment
The tribunal struck out the constructive unfair dismissal claim and refused the amendment to add a disability claim.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant had a reasonable prospect of proving that his employer's decision to remove him from his role, as part of a restructure, amounted to a fundamental breach of contract justifying constructive dismissal. It also considered whether a late disability discrimination claim could be added.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out the constructive unfair dismissal claim, finding no reasonable prospect of success. The employer had legitimately restructured the department, reducing the need for Grade 7 nurses to one, and the claimant was offered an alternative role with adjustments recommended by occupational health. The tribunal also refused the claimant's application to add a disability discrimination claim, as it was out of time and had no reasonable prospect of success: the duty to make reasonable adjustments does not require an employer to keep an employee in a role that no longer exists.
No compensation was awarded as the claim was struck out.
Lessons & takeaways
- Constructive dismissal requires a fundamental breach of contract – a genuine restructure with a fair process is unlikely to count as such.
- If you resign long after the alleged breach, you may be seen as having accepted the situation and waived your right to claim constructive dismissal.
- Disability discrimination claims must be brought within three months of the act complained of; delays are rarely excused without good reason.
- Employers are not required to keep a disabled employee in a role that has been genuinely removed as part of a restructure.
This case shows the limits of constructive dismissal claims when an employer carries out a genuine restructure. The claimant, a Grade 7 nurse, was removed from his role after the department was reorganised and only one such role remained. He was offered an alternative ward-based role with adjustments recommended by occupational health, but he resigned several months later and claimed constructive unfair dismissal.
What the tribunal decided
The tribunal struck out the claim at an early stage, finding no reasonable prospect of success. The employer had explained the process in detail, and the claimant did not argue it was a sham. The tribunal noted that the employer was entitled to reorganise its department without interference, and that the duty to make reasonable adjustments does not require keeping an employee in a role that no longer exists.
What could have been done differently
The claimant could have accepted the alternative role offered, which was supported by occupational health. By waiting several months before resigning, he also risked being seen as having accepted the change. For employers, the case reinforces the importance of a clear, documented restructure process and offering suitable alternative roles where possible.
Why this matters
This case is a reminder that constructive dismissal claims based on organisational change face a high hurdle. Tribunals are reluctant to second-guess genuine business decisions, especially when the employee is offered an alternative role. It also highlights the strict time limits for disability discrimination claims – delays are rarely forgiven without strong justification.
Similar cases
Deputy team manager's constructive dismissal claims struck out as out of time
A social worker who resigned claiming constructive dismissal had all her claims struck out after presenting them two weeks late. The tribunal refused amendments and found no reasonable excuse for the delay.
20-year manager dismissed for capability after employer refused to adjust role for disability
A Global Governance Risk and Compliance Manager with 20 years' service was unfairly dismissed and discriminated against after GlaxoSmithKline failed to make reasonable adjustments for her hand disability. The tribunal awarded £24,785 for injury to feelings.
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.
Registered Nurse lost constructive dismissal claim over protected disclosure and discrimination
A tribunal dismissed all claims by a dementia ward nurse who resigned after suspension, finding no link between his protected disclosure and the employer's actions.