Sales manager's constructive dismissal claim over contractual terms fails
A sales manager who resigned after raising concerns about standard contractual terms lost his unfair dismissal claim when the tribunal found his disclosures were not protected.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a sales manager from 19 August 2019 to 30 October 2020.
- The claimant raised concerns about the respondent's standard contractual terms on multiple occasions.
- On 19 October 2020, the claimant shared a confidential framework agreement from a previous employer on a Teams chat.
- The respondent investigated the sharing of the document, leading to a disciplinary investigation.
- The claimant resigned on 30 October 2020, claiming constructive dismissal due to whistleblowing.
- The tribunal found that none of the claimant's disclosures were protected disclosures.
Timeline
-
Employment started
The claimant began employment as a sales manager in the UK metocean forecasting team.
-
First disclosure (verbal)
The claimant verbally raised concerns about the respondent's standard contractual terms at a weekly sales meeting.
-
Second disclosure (verbal)
The claimant raised concerns about contractual terms during a commercial training session.
-
Email to Neville Smith
The claimant emailed his manager about improving contractual terms.
-
Email to Rachel Griffiths
The claimant forwarded his concerns to a contract manager.
-
Email to George Grangeon
The claimant repeated his concerns about contractual terms.
-
Sharing of confidential document
The claimant shared a confidential framework agreement from a previous employer on a Microsoft Teams chat.
-
Investigation meeting
The claimant attended an investigation meeting regarding the sharing of the confidential document.
-
Multiple disclosures
The claimant sent emails alleging breaches of confidentiality and legal obligations, including a Speak Up report.
-
Resignation
The claimant resigned with immediate effect, claiming constructive unfair dismissal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's repeated concerns about the respondent's standard contractual terms amounted to protected disclosures under whistleblowing law, and if so, whether he was constructively dismissed because of them.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's claim for unfair dismissal. It found that none of the disclosures he made—whether verbal or written—were protected disclosures under the Employment Rights Act 1996. The concerns he raised about contractual terms did not relate to a failure to comply with a legal obligation, nor did they involve a breach of confidentiality or any other prescribed category. As a result, the tribunal did not need to consider whether he was subjected to detriments or constructively dismissed. No compensation was awarded.
Lessons & takeaways
- Not every complaint at work counts as a protected disclosure—it must relate to a specific legal obligation or prescribed wrongdoing.
- Raising concerns about standard contractual terms, even repeatedly, may not qualify as whistleblowing if no legal duty is breached.
- Sharing a confidential document from a previous employer can lead to disciplinary action and may undermine a whistleblowing claim.
- Resigning before a disciplinary process concludes can weaken a constructive dismissal case, especially if the employer was still investigating.
When raising concerns is not whistleblowing
This case shows that not every complaint about working conditions or contractual terms will be protected as whistleblowing. The sales manager had repeatedly raised concerns about the respondent's standard contractual terms, but the tribunal found these did not relate to a failure to comply with a legal obligation. The concerns were about commercial terms, not about a breach of law or other prescribed wrongdoing.
What went wrong for the claimant
The claimant's case unravelled when he shared a confidential framework agreement from a previous employer on a Teams chat. This led to an investigation, and he resigned before it concluded. The tribunal found that his disclosures were not protected, so the investigation and his resignation could not be linked to whistleblowing. If the claimant had focused on specific legal breaches—such as health and safety or environmental law—the outcome might have been different.
Key takeaway for similar claims
Employees considering a whistleblowing claim should ensure their disclosures fall within the legal definition of a protected disclosure. Simply raising concerns about contractual terms or internal policies is unlikely to qualify. Legal advice is crucial before resigning and claiming constructive dismissal, as the timing and nature of disclosures are critical.
Similar cases
Interim relief refused after disputed conversation about authorising officer role
A Senior Mobility Specialist who resigned after allegedly being pressured to take on an authorising officer role failed to win interim relief for automatic unfair dismissal. The tribunal found she did not have a 'pretty good chance' of success.
Whistleblowing claim over covid safety fails: tribunal finds employer's actions were about cryptocurrency miners
A mechanical technician who raised covid-19 safety concerns was investigated for setting up cryptocurrency miners on site. The tribunal dismissed his whistleblowing claim, finding the investigation was about the miners, not his disclosures.
Social worker's constructive dismissal claim allowed to proceed despite being late
A social worker with 14 years' service resigned after raising concerns about a colleague's return to work. Her claim was filed 7 days late, but the tribunal allowed it to proceed due to ongoing ACAS negotiations and her mental health.
Software engineer's interim relief bid fails after resignation retraction refused
A software engineer who tried to retract her resignation the same day she sent it could not show she had a 'pretty good chance' of proving whistleblowing dismissal. The tribunal dismissed her interim relief application.