Employee who resigned after investigation meeting loses unfair dismissal claim
A school staff member who claimed she was unfairly dismissed after an investigation meeting was found by the tribunal to have resigned voluntarily. Her claim was dismissed and she was ordered to pay £300 in costs.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #resignation
- #investigation-meeting
- #gross-misconduct
- #polkey-deduction
- #costs-order
Key facts
- The claimant resigned on 22 November 2021 by giving notice via WhatsApp.
- On 27 November 2021, the claimant attended an investigation meeting about being seen on a scout hike while off sick.
- After the meeting, the claimant returned her ID badge and threw her headscarf out of the car window.
- The tribunal found the claimant's actions on 27 November amounted to resignation without notice.
- The claimant's claim of unfair dismissal was dismissed because there was no dismissal.
- The respondent was awarded £300 in costs due to the claimant's unreasonable conduct causing an adjournment.
Timeline
-
First employment period starts
Claimant started working for the respondent.
-
First employment period ends
Claimant left the respondent.
-
Re-employment
Claimant re-joined the respondent in the same position.
-
Claimant reported son's assault and sick leave
Claimant informed respondent her son was assaulted and she was unwell, unable to work on 20 November.
-
Claimant attended scout hike while off sick
Claimant went on a scout hike and sent a text message asking others to keep it secret.
-
Claimant resigned via WhatsApp
Claimant sent a message resigning from her post, effective mid-December.
-
Investigation meeting and alleged dismissal
Claimant attended an unannounced meeting about the hike, returned her ID badge, and threw her headscarf out of the car window. Tribunal found she resigned.
-
Claim form submitted
Claimant brought a claim of unfair dismissal.
-
Substantive hearing (day 1)
In-person hearing at Reading Employment Tribunal.
-
Substantive hearing (day 2)
In-person hearing concluded.
-
Judgment issued
Tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim, finding claimant resigned.
-
Costs judgment
Claimant ordered to pay £300 costs for unreasonable conduct causing adjournment.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed or whether she resigned voluntarily on 27 November 2021.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim, finding that the claimant had resigned voluntarily. The key reasons were:
- The claimant sent a resignation message via WhatsApp on 22 November 2021.
- At the investigation meeting on 27 November, she returned her ID badge and threw her headscarf out of the car window, which the tribunal interpreted as a resignation without notice.
- The claimant's conduct did not amount to a dismissal by the employer.
Compensation breakdown:
- No compensation awarded as the claim was dismissed.
- The claimant was ordered to pay £300 in costs for unreasonable conduct causing an adjournment.
Lessons & takeaways
- If you resign, even informally via WhatsApp, it may be treated as a valid resignation – think carefully before sending such messages.
- Attending an investigation meeting and then walking out or returning property can be seen as confirming your resignation, not as being dismissed.
- Taking legal action without a clear dismissal can lead to a costs order against you if your conduct is deemed unreasonable.
- If you are off sick, avoid activities that could appear inconsistent with your illness, as this may be used against you in disciplinary proceedings.
When a resignation is not a dismissal
This case shows how important it is to distinguish between resigning and being dismissed. The former employee, a school staff member, had been off sick after her son was assaulted. She attended a scout hike while on sick leave and asked others to keep it secret. When the employer found out, they called her to an investigation meeting. At that meeting, she handed back her ID badge and threw her headscarf out of the car window. The tribunal found that these actions, combined with a previous WhatsApp resignation message, meant she had resigned – not been dismissed.
What the employer could have done differently
The employer, Al Iman Community Educational Services Ltd., handled the situation by holding an investigation meeting. However, the tribunal did not criticise their process because the employee's own actions were the cause of the termination. If the employer had wanted to avoid any ambiguity, they could have confirmed the resignation in writing and given the employee a chance to reconsider. But here, the employee's conduct was clear enough.
Why this matters for similar claims
For employees, this case is a reminder that resigning in the heat of the moment – especially after being confronted about misconduct – can be final. Tribunals will look at the whole picture, including messages and behaviour, to decide whether there was a dismissal. For employers, it shows that if an employee clearly resigns, there is no need to go through a formal dismissal process. However, it is always wise to document the resignation and ensure it is voluntary.
Similar cases
PCV driver dismissed after failing breath tests: flawed appeal but dismissal largely upheld
A PCV driver who failed three breath alcohol tests was unfairly dismissed due to a flawed appeal, but the tribunal found she would have been dismissed anyway and reduced compensation by 75% for contributory conduct.
Dismissed for breaching a COT3 agreement: tribunal finds employer's belief unreasonable
A Customer Care Assistant with 10 years' service was unfairly dismissed after being accused of breaching a COT3 settlement agreement. The tribunal awarded £9,074, but applied a 50% Polkey reduction.
Manager dismissed for password breach wins unfair dismissal claim
A manager with six years' service was unfairly dismissed after a flawed investigation into password sharing and order deletion. The tribunal awarded £5,552 but reduced compensation because he contributed to his own dismissal.
Care worker dismissed for mistreating dementia resident: unfair process but no compensation
A care home worker was unfairly dismissed after procedural flaws, but the tribunal found her guilty of the alleged misconduct and reduced compensation to zero.