Mr G Mayo v NHS South East London ICB: 6020221/2024

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS

Case No 6020221/2024

Between

Mr G MayoClaimant

NHS South East London ICBRespondent

Before

Employment Judge M Da Costa

Date 18 January 2026

JUDGMENT

The judgment of the Tribunal is as follows: Complaint of unfair constructive dismissal pursuant to section 95(1)(c) and 111(1) Employment Rights Act 1996 contrary to section 94 of that Act

[1]The claimant’s claim for constructive unfair dismissal is not well founded and is dismissed.

[2]The claimant was not constructively dismissed within the meaning of the common law as codified in section 95(1)(c) of the Act. Case No. 6020221/2024

[3]This is because there was no breach by the respondent of any fundamental term of the contract (and thereby no entitlement for the claimant to resign in repudiation of the contract).

[4]The respondent’s desire to change the claimant’s working pattern was founded on a legitimate business need and was the subject of extensive consultation between the respondent and the claimant. It was, at all times and over a period of some months, open to the claimant to take reasonable steps to resolve the impasse in negotiations that had arisen between the claimant and the respondent by making reasonable enquiries and efforts, which he was unwilling to do. The claimant’s behaviour in resigning in response was therefore not reasonable.

[5]Given that the claimant did not have the right to repudiate the contract for fundamental breach by the respondent, the question whether he affirmed the contract after breach by the respondent did not arise.

[6]Given that the claimant was not constructively dismissed or otherwise dismissed at all, the question whether the respondent had a potentially fair reason for dismissal, and whether it acted fairly in treating such reason as a sufficient reason for dismissing the claimant within the meaning of section 98(4) of the Act, did not arise. M Da Costa