Read our disclaimer keyboard_arrow_down
This website content is intended as a general guide to law as it applies to the motor trade. Lawgistics has taken every effort to ensure that the contents are as accurate and up to date as at the date of first publication.
The laws and opinions expressed within this website may be varied as the law develops. As such we cannot accept liability for or the consequence of, any change of law, or official guidelines since publication or any misuse of the information provided.
The opinions in this website are based upon the experience of the authors and it must be recognised that only the courts and recognised tribunals can interpret the law with authority.
Examples given within the website are based on the experience of the authors and centre upon issues that commonly give rise to disputes. Each situation in practice will be different and may comprise several points commented upon.
If you have any doubt about the correct legal position you should seek further legal advice from Lawgistics or a suitably qualified solicitor. We cannot accept liability for your failure to take professional advice where it should reasonably be sought by a prudent person.
All characters are fictitious and should not be taken as referring to any person living or dead.
Use of this website shall be considered acceptance of the terms of the disclaimer presented above.
Constructive dismissal is usually defined where by an employee terminates their employment in response to a fundamental breach by the employer. Despite the employee terminating the employment, it is classed as a dismissal by the employer.
In Tullett Prebon plc and ors V BGC Brokers Lp and ors, Court of Appeal, it was held that an employer has not constructively dismissed an employee where they have tried to persuade them not to join a competitor. It was held that the employer’s intention was of paramount importance, in that the case was centred on the poaching of staff.
Because the employer did not wish them to leave, their actions in trying to make them stay did not amount a repudiatory breach of contract, and thus no claim of constructive dismissal could be made.
Further reading of the case shows that the employee’s wished to use constructive dismissal as a mechanism to end their contractual obligations and restrictive covenants in relation to working for a competitor early so that they could undertake forward contracts. Their employer’s intentions therefore were to strengthen the business relationship with the employees and not weaken it.