Reinstated after appeal but resigned: constructive dismissal claim fails
An HGV driver who was dismissed for fuel discrepancies, reinstated on appeal, then resigned was not constructively dismissed. The tribunal also ordered her to pay £21,000 in costs.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #constructive-dismissal
- #reinstatement
- #fuel-discrepancy
- #volvo-data
- #deposit-order
- #costs-order
Key facts
- The claimant was dismissed for gross misconduct due to fuel discrepancies but reinstated on appeal.
- The claimant resigned after reinstatement, claiming constructive dismissal.
- The tribunal found no breach of trust and confidence by the employer.
- The claimant's claims for unpaid wages and holiday pay were also dismissed.
- The claimant was ordered to pay costs of £21,000 for the final hearing.
Timeline
-
Meeting with Volvo expert
Mrs Davis met with Volvo Fuel Watch Manager to verify fuel data accuracy.
-
Invitation to disciplinary hearing
Claimant invited to disciplinary hearing regarding fuel discrepancies.
-
Appeal hearing
Appeal hearing conducted by Mrs Kemball; claimant sought compensation.
-
Appeal outcome
Mrs Kemball overturned dismissal, reinstated claimant with back pay.
-
Claimant resigned
Claimant sent resignation letter, received by respondent on 16 July 2020.
-
Deposit orders made
Employment Judge Hyams made deposit orders for unfair dismissal and discrimination claims.
-
Preliminary hearing
Employment Judge Cowen heard applications for strike out, deposit orders, and costs.
-
Final merits hearing
Three-day hearing before Employment Judge Postle and members.
-
Judgment
Tribunal dismissed all claims and ordered claimant to pay £21,000 costs.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employer's conduct, including the original dismissal and subsequent reinstatement, amounted to a fundamental breach of contract that entitled the driver to resign and claim constructive dismissal.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims. It found that the employer's decision to dismiss was overturned on appeal, and the driver was reinstated with back pay. There was no evidence that the employer had acted in a way that destroyed trust and confidence after reinstatement. The driver's resignation was a voluntary decision, not a response to a breach of contract.
The tribunal also ordered the driver to pay costs of £21,000 for the final hearing due to her unreasonable conduct in pursuing weak claims.
Lessons & takeaways
- If you are reinstated after an appeal, you cannot later claim constructive dismissal based on the original dismissal – the employer has put things right.
- Constructive dismissal requires a serious breach of contract by the employer; disagreeing with a disciplinary outcome is not enough.
- Pursuing weak claims can lead to a costs order, even in the employment tribunal, if the tribunal considers your conduct unreasonable.
What this case shows
This case illustrates the limits of constructive dismissal claims when an employer corrects its own mistake. The HGV driver was dismissed for gross misconduct over fuel discrepancies, but after an internal appeal the employer overturned the decision and reinstated her with full back pay. Instead of returning to work, she resigned and claimed she had been constructively dismissed.
The tribunal rejected that argument. Once the employer had reinstated her, the original dismissal was no longer a live issue. The driver could not rely on it as a breach of contract because the employer had effectively undone it. Nor was there any evidence of a new breach after reinstatement.
What the employer did right
Debach Enterprises Limited acted reasonably by conducting a thorough appeal, involving a Volvo expert to verify fuel data, and reinstating the driver with back pay. This corrected any procedural flaws in the original disciplinary process. The tribunal noted that the employer had not acted in a way that destroyed trust and confidence.
Why the costs order matters
The driver was ordered to pay £21,000 in costs – a significant sum in the employment tribunal. This happened because the tribunal found that she had pursued claims that had little prospect of success, and her conduct during the proceedings had been unreasonable. It is a reminder that bringing a weak claim can be financially risky, even if you believe you have been treated unfairly.
Similar cases
Social worker's whistleblowing and constructive dismissal claim rejected
A registered social worker who resigned and claimed constructive unfair dismissal after allegedly blowing the whistle has had his claim thrown out. The tribunal found no protected disclosure and no fundamental breach of contract, and ordered him to pay £2,700 in costs.
Bus driver with 27 years' service resigns at disciplinary hearing: constructive dismissal claim fails
A bus driver who resigned at the start of a disciplinary hearing for driving through a red light lost his constructive dismissal claim. The tribunal found no breach of contract by London General Transport Services Limited.
Customer sales assistant's constructive dismissal and discrimination claims dismissed as out of time
A customer sales assistant who resigned claiming constructive unfair dismissal and discrimination had most of her claims thrown out for being brought too late. The tribunal also ordered her to pay £11,300 in costs.
Constructive dismissal claim allowed to proceed after employer ignored redundancy request for 39 days
A former People Advisor who resigned after her employer failed to respond to her redundancy request for 39 days has been allowed to pursue claims for a redundancy payment and constructive unfair dismissal.