SEO Lead's constructive dismissal claim fails: tribunal finds no disability or breach
A tribunal rejected a constructive dismissal and disability discrimination claim by a Harrods SEO Lead, finding he was not disabled and that the employer's performance management was not a breach of contract.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as an SEO Lead from 17 June 2019 to 9 August 2021.
- The claimant was placed on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) on 4 December 2020 due to performance concerns.
- The claimant resigned on 13 July 2021, giving four weeks' notice.
- The tribunal found the claimant was not a disabled person at the material time.
- The tribunal found no fundamental breach of contract and no constructive dismissal.
- The claimant had booked a flight to South Korea on 9 July 2021, before resigning.
Timeline
-
GP consultation for anxiety
Claimant contacted GP about anxiety; this was an isolated incident.
-
Contacted Workplace Options
Claimant sought support for anxiety and stress; received a single therapy session.
-
First OH appointment
Claimant reported feeling low; OH recommended a week off work.
-
Follow-up OH appointment
Claimant's symptoms had improved; OH closed the case.
-
PIP commenced
Claimant was placed on a one-month Performance Improvement Plan.
-
PIP extended
PIP extended for a further month as performance had not met standards.
-
First disciplinary meeting
Claimant received a first written warning for underperformance.
-
Third OH appointment
OH recommended concluding PIP as quickly as possible where possible.
-
Second disciplinary meeting
Claimant issued with a final written warning and a PIP reset.
-
Resignation
Claimant resigned by email, claiming constructive dismissal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's anxiety and depression amounted to a disability under the Equality Act 2010, and whether Harrods' performance management process breached the implied term of trust and confidence, leading to constructive dismissal.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims. It found that the claimant was not a disabled person because his anxiety and depression did not have a substantial and long-term adverse effect on his daily activities at the relevant time. The tribunal also held that Harrods' actions—placing him on a PIP, issuing warnings, and not ending the PIP early—did not breach the implied term of trust and confidence. The claimant's resignation was not in response to a fundamental breach. No compensation was awarded.
Lessons & takeaways
- To succeed in a disability discrimination claim, you must show that your condition has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities at the time of the alleged discrimination.
- A Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) and disciplinary warnings, if handled reasonably, are unlikely to amount to a fundamental breach of contract justifying constructive dismissal.
- Resigning before exploring internal grievance procedures can weaken a constructive dismissal claim, as tribunals may view it as a pre-emptive step rather than a response to a breach.
- Employers should ensure they follow their own policies and consider occupational health advice, but a failure to follow every recommendation does not automatically mean a breach of contract.
A performance management process that passed legal scrutiny
This case shows that not every stressful performance management process will give rise to a successful constructive dismissal or discrimination claim. The SEO Lead, who had worked at Harrods for just over two years, was placed on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) in December 2020 due to concerns about his work. Over the following months, the PIP was extended, and he received a first written warning and then a final written warning. He resigned in July 2021, claiming that Harrods had breached the implied term of trust and confidence and discriminated against him because of his anxiety and depression.
Why the tribunal rejected the disability claim
The tribunal carefully examined whether the claimant's anxiety and depression met the legal definition of disability. It found that while he had experienced some symptoms, they did not have a 'substantial' (more than minor or trivial) and 'long-term' (lasting or likely to last 12 months) adverse effect on his normal day-to-day activities at the time of the alleged discrimination. Key factors included that his GP consultations were isolated, his symptoms improved after a week off work, and he had not sought ongoing treatment. This meant the disability discrimination claims failed at the first hurdle.
No fundamental breach of contract
Even if the claimant had been disabled, the tribunal found that Harrods' actions did not breach the implied term of trust and confidence. The PIP and warnings were based on genuine performance concerns, and the employer had considered occupational health advice. The tribunal noted that the claimant had booked a flight to South Korea before resigning, which suggested his decision to leave was not solely driven by the employer's conduct. The message for employees is clear: a robust but fair performance management process is unlikely to be a constructive dismissal, especially where the employer has acted reasonably throughout.
Similar cases
Street Scene Worker's constructive dismissal claim fails over shielding dispute
A Street Scene Worker with disabilities resigned after his employer required a GP fitness letter to return from shielding. The tribunal rejected his constructive unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims.
Placed at risk of redundancy while on sick leave: disability discrimination claim succeeds
A former employee with PTSD was placed at risk of redundancy while on sick leave. The tribunal found it was discrimination arising from disability and awarded £12,183.
Shift team leader loses constructive dismissal claim after credibility issues
A shift team leader with 9 years' service resigned after being placed on a performance improvement plan, but the tribunal dismissed all claims, finding no breach of contract and serious credibility problems with his evidence.
Procurement director's constructive dismissal claim over whistleblowing and disability fails
A procurement director who resigned after raising concerns about commission on expired contracts has lost her tribunal claims for constructive unfair dismissal, whistleblowing detriment and disability discrimination.