Supply teacher's role ended after permanent appointment: dismissal upheld as 'some other substantial reason'
A tribunal dismissed claims for unfair and wrongful dismissal brought by a supply teacher whose role ended when a permanent teacher was appointed. No compensation was awarded.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #supply-teacher
- #fixed-term-contract
- #some-other-substantial-reason
- #day-to-day-engagement
- #burgundy-book
Key facts
- The claimant worked as a teacher at Ysgol Nant y Groes from April 2017, initially on fixed-term contracts covering maternity leave.
- From September 2021, the claimant taught in the ASD unit on a day-to-day supply basis, without a written contract.
- The ASD role was advertised externally in January 2022; the claimant applied but was unsuccessful.
- The claimant was informed on 2 February 2022 that his employment would end at the end of the term (8 April 2022) because the successful candidate would start after Easter.
- The tribunal found the claimant was a supply teacher on a day-to-day basis, not on a fixed-term contract, and therefore not entitled to notice under the Burgundy Book.
Timeline
-
Started employment
Claimant began working at Ysgol Nant y Groes as a temporary teacher covering maternity leave.
-
Started ASD unit role
Claimant began teaching in the Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) unit on a full-time basis, understood to be temporary until a permanent appointment.
-
ASD role advertised
The ASD teacher role was advertised externally. Claimant applied.
-
Interview and rejection
Claimant interviewed for the ASD role but was unsuccessful. He was told his employment would end at the end of the term (8 April 2022).
-
Incident in classroom
An alleged incident occurred involving the claimant's behaviour in the classroom.
-
Suspension
Claimant was suspended with immediate effect.
-
Employment ended
Claimant's employment as a supply teacher ended.
-
Claim presented
Claimant presented claims for unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed and whether he was entitled to notice pay, given his status as a supply teacher on a day-to-day basis.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed both claims.
- The claimant was a supply teacher on a day-to-day basis, not on a fixed-term contract, so his employment ended naturally when the permanent teacher started.
- The dismissal was for 'some other substantial reason' – the need to appoint a permanent teacher – which was fair.
- No compensation was awarded.
Lessons & takeaways
- Supply teachers on day-to-day engagements should be aware that their role can end without notice when a permanent appointment is made.
- If you are a supply teacher, check your payslips to understand your employment status – they may show whether you are paid on a supply basis.
- Employers should clearly communicate the basis of engagement, especially when moving from fixed-term contracts to day-to-day supply arrangements.
- A dismissal for 'some other substantial reason' can be fair if it relates to a genuine business need, such as filling a role permanently.
This case highlights the importance of understanding the nature of your employment, especially when moving from fixed-term contracts to day-to-day supply teaching. The claimant had worked at the school for six years, initially on fixed-term contracts covering maternity leave. From September 2021, he taught in the ASD unit on a full-time basis, but without a written contract. He believed his employment continued as before, but the school treated him as a day-to-day supply teacher.
When the school advertised the ASD role permanently in January 2022, the claimant applied but was unsuccessful. He was told his employment would end at the end of the term because the successful candidate would start after Easter. The claimant argued he was entitled to notice under the Burgundy Book, but the tribunal found that as a supply teacher on a day-to-day basis, he had no fixed-term contract and no entitlement to notice.
The tribunal also considered the claimant's suspension and the incident in the classroom, but these did not affect the outcome. The key issue was that the dismissal was for 'some other substantial reason' – the need to appoint a permanent teacher. This was a fair reason, and the employer acted reasonably in ending the arrangement once the permanent appointment was made.
What could have been done differently
The employer could have avoided confusion by providing a written contract or letter clarifying the change from fixed-term to day-to-day supply. The claimant could have sought clarity on his status when he started the ASD role. However, the tribunal accepted that the payslips indicated supply teacher payments, and the school's practice was not to issue contracts for such arrangements.
Why this matters
This case serves as a reminder that supply teachers on day-to-day engagements have fewer protections than those on fixed-term contracts. It also shows that employers can fairly dismiss for 'some other substantial reason' when a permanent appointment is made, provided the reason is genuine and the process is reasonable.
Similar cases
Locum consultant's fixed-term contract not renewed: workforce review justified dismissal
An employment tribunal has ruled that an NHS trust fairly dismissed a locum consultant when it decided to recruit only substantive Consultants on the Specialist Register, ending the need for locum cover.
NHS business coordinator dismissed after refusing restructured role: 'some other substantial reason' upheld
A tribunal rejected claims of unfair dismissal and race discrimination by a Business Coordinator who refused a restructured role and went on sick leave. The dismissal for 'some other substantial reason' was fair.
Dismissed after visa sponsorship became impossible: Home Office rule change was 'some other substantial reason'
A tribunal has ruled that Fintru Limited fairly dismissed an associate whose skilled worker visa could not be renewed after the Home Office raised salary thresholds. The employer explored alternatives and followed a reasonable process.
Senior HR manager's constructive dismissal claim dismissed: resignation was for better job
A senior HR manager who resigned after accepting a higher-paid job failed to prove constructive unfair dismissal or discrimination. The Birmingham tribunal found no breach of contract by National Highways Ltd.