판결 이유
Constructive dismissal requires a fundamental breach of contract by the employer. The test is contractual, not based on the employer's unreasonable conduct. The employee must show the employer breached a fundamental term of the contract, they resigned in response to that breach, and they did not delay too long (thereby affirming the contract).
사실관계
Mr Sharp was suspended without pay for taking time off without permission. He asked for an advance on his holiday pay and accrued pay to tide him over but was refused. He resigned and claimed constructive dismissal, arguing that the employer's conduct was so unreasonable that he was entitled to resign.
판결 요약
The Court of Appeal held that the test for constructive dismissal is contractual, not based on reasonableness. Lord Denning MR stated that the employer must be guilty of conduct which is a significant breach going to the root of the contract, or which shows the employer no longer intends to be bound by one or more of the essential terms of the contract. The employee must then leave in response to the breach, not for some other unconnected reason, and must not delay too long or they will be taken to have affirmed the contract.
주요 인용문
"If the employer is guilty of conduct which is a significant breach going to the root of the contract of employment, or which shows that the employer no longer intends to be bound by one or more of the essential terms of the contract, then the employee is entitled to treat himself as discharged from any further performance."
— Lord Denning MR
후속 처리
Consistently applied as the definitive test for constructive dismissal in employment law.
Applied extensively with the implied term of mutual trust and confidence (Malik v BCCI [1998]).