Tribunal Error: Constructive Dismissal Claim Reinstated in Kinch v Compassion in World Farming
The EAT overturned a decision to strike out a constructive dismissal claim, finding the tribunal erred in its assessment of contract affirmation. The case will now proceed to a full hearing.
• public
Constructive Dismissal Claim Reinstated After Appeal Tribunal Ruling
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has overturned a decision by an employment tribunal to strike out a claim of constructive unfair dismissal brought by Mrs. Helen Kinch against Compassion in World Farming International. The case, Kinch v Compassion in World Farming International [2025] EAT 41, was heard before The Hon. Lord Fairley, President, on 19 March 2025, with the judgment handed down on 26 March 2025.
Background of the Dispute
Mrs. Kinch resigned from her position as UK Finance Controller, citing a repudiatory breach of contract after her request for flexible working was denied. She claimed she was constructively unfairly dismissed. The employer, Compassion in World Farming International, argued that Mrs. Kinch had affirmed the contract by agreeing to extend her notice period.
Tribunal's Initial Decision
The original employment tribunal struck out Mrs. Kinch's claim, concluding it had no reasonable prospect of success. The tribunal reasoned that the series of agreed extensions to her notice period constituted affirmation of the employment contract, nullifying the constructive dismissal claim.
Appeal Tribunal's Findings
Lord Fairley, presiding over the EAT, found that the employment tribunal had made a critical error in its understanding of the facts. The EAT emphasized that a key part of the initial judge’s reasoning was his understanding that the claimant repeatedly asked for extensions to her notice period for her own benefit, however, this was factually incorrect. The EAT noted there was no support for such a conclusion in the pleadings, written submissions, or contemporaneous documents.
The EAT held that the circumstances surrounding the extensions to the notice period were crucial in determining whether the contract had been affirmed. It was deemed an error of law to conclude that affirmation could be resolved without hearing evidence. The strike-out judgment was therefore set aside.
Outcome and Remittal
The EAT has remitted the case to a differently constituted tribunal to hear evidence on the merits of the constructive unfair dismissal claim, the employer's defence of affirmation, and any other relevant factual issues.
This case highlights the importance of carefully considering all factual circumstances and hearing evidence before striking out a claim, particularly where there are disputes over material facts related to contract affirmation in constructive dismissal cases.
Read the entire judgement here: Mrs Helen Kinch v Compassion in World Farming International [2025] EAT 41
