Whistleblowing constructive dismissal: 19-year service director wins over £190,000
A director with 19 years' service was constructively dismissed after raising concerns about a colleague breaching court undertakings. The tribunal awarded over £190,000.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed by the respondent from 2000, becoming a director in 2003.
- In 2011, the respondent gave court undertakings that Mr Newsome would not manage the company.
- The claimant raised concerns about Mr Newsome's management role in his grievance of 31 May 2019.
- The respondent commenced disciplinary action against the claimant in January 2019 over a conference call incident.
- The claimant resigned on 15 September 2019 after the grievance appeal was rejected.
- The majority of the tribunal found the claimant was constructively and automatically unfairly dismissed for whistleblowing.
Timeline
-
Employment started
The claimant began working for the respondent as an account manager.
-
Appointed Sales and Marketing Director
The claimant was appointed to the respondent's Board as Sales and Marketing Director.
-
Share proposal discussed
Mr Newsome and Mr Baker proposed that the claimant and Ms Merrygold would each receive a 25.5% shareholding after 7 years.
-
Court undertakings given
Mr Newsome gave undertakings to the court to step down from the Board and not be involved in management.
-
Share proposal not fulfilled
The claimant was not given the 25.5% shareholding but accepted a bonus payment instead.
-
Board meeting conflict
Mr Sinclair-Ford criticised the claimant's performance; voices were raised and the claimant's termination was mentioned.
-
Removed from Board
The respondent's Directors voted to remove the claimant from the Board due to poor performance.
-
Conference call incident
The claimant arranged a conference call without inviting MAST, contrary to Mr Newsome's instructions.
-
Disciplinary investigation started
Mr Sinclair-Ford began an investigation into the claimant's conduct regarding the MAST incident.
-
Grievance letter sent
The claimant's solicitors sent a grievance letter containing a protected disclosure about Mr Newsome's management role.
-
Grievance outcome
The respondent rejected the claimant's grievance in a letter signed by Ms Merrygold.
-
Accepted new job
The claimant accepted a job offer from Genmed, the respondent's competitor, starting 1 October 2019.
-
Grievance appeal outcome
Mr Baker rejected the claimant's grievance appeal.
-
Resignation
The claimant resigned with immediate effect, citing the respondent's failure to appoint an independent third party for the grievance appeal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was constructively dismissed and, if so, whether the principal reason for the dismissal was his protected disclosure about Mr Newsome's breach of court undertakings.
The outcome
The tribunal found that the claimant was constructively and automatically unfairly dismissed for whistleblowing. The majority held that the respondent's failure to properly handle the claimant's grievance, including not appointing an independent third party for the appeal, breached the implied term of trust and confidence.
Compensation:
- Total award: £190,361.34 (no breakdown provided in the facts)
Lessons & takeaways
- If you have a genuine concern about wrongdoing at work, raising it in a formal grievance can be a protected disclosure, even if you also have other grievances.
- Employers should take whistleblowing complaints seriously and ensure grievance processes are independent and impartial, especially when the complaint involves senior management.
- Long-serving employees (19 years here) may have stronger claims because the tribunal expects a higher standard of treatment and process.
- Resigning in response to a fundamental breach of trust and confidence can lead to a successful constructive dismissal claim, but you must act promptly and not affirm the contract.
A 19-year career ends in whistleblowing claim
This case shows how a long-serving employee can successfully claim constructive dismissal when their employer fails to address a protected disclosure. The claimant, an account director who had been with the company for 19 years, raised concerns in a grievance about a colleague, Mr Newsome, managing the company despite court undertakings to the contrary. The tribunal found this was a protected disclosure.
What went wrong for the employer
The respondent, Chrystal Consulting Limited, mishandled the grievance process. The claimant's grievance appeal was rejected by Mr Baker, who was not independent. The tribunal said this failure to appoint an independent third party for the appeal was a fundamental breach of trust and confidence. The claimant resigned shortly after, and the tribunal upheld his claim.
Why this matters
This case highlights that whistleblowing protections apply even when the disclosure is made in a grievance about other issues. Employers must ensure that grievance and disciplinary processes are fair and independent, particularly when the complaint involves senior figures. The substantial award of over £190,000 reflects the seriousness of the breach and the claimant's long service.
Similar cases
Constructive dismissal after flawed grievance process: DHL manager wins unfair dismissal claim
A warehouse first line manager with three years' service at DHL Services Limited resigned after a flawed grievance process. The tribunal upheld his claim for constructive unfair dismissal.
Whistleblowing claim struck out: when the disclosure comes too late
Two warehouse operatives had their automatic unfair dismissal claims for whistleblowing struck out because the alleged breaches happened before they made their protected disclosure. The tribunal said the claims had no reasonable prospects of success.
Coach driver who resigned over fume fears wins constructive dismissal claim
A coach driver who repeatedly raised concerns about diesel fumes in his minibus and resigned after a poorly handled disciplinary meeting has won his claim for constructive unfair dismissal.
Whistleblowing constructive dismissal claim fails: tribunal finds no evidence of detriment
A former employee who resigned and claimed constructive dismissal for whistleblowing and health and safety reasons has lost her case after the tribunal found no evidence of detriment or dismissal for those reasons.