G E S Ltd

Case Summary

A security guard employed by the respondent at a shopping centre initially resigned on 11 June 2024 due to workplace issues. The respondent did not immediately accept the resignation and only formally accepted it on 5 July 2024 after the shopping centre management indicated they did not want the claimant to return. The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed because the respondent failed to follow a fair procedure and did not properly invoke the "some other substantial reason" ground that might have been available.

The claimant was unfairly dismissed because the respondent failed to follow a fair procedure. Although the respondent could potentially have relied on some other substantial reason (third party pressure from the shopping centre management), it did not properly treat this as the reason for dismissal and instead relied on the claimant's earlier resignation email. The absence of any procedural fairness, investigation, consultation, or consideration of alternative work rendered the dismissal unfair.

Use these claim-type pages to compare this decision with other published tribunal cases, outcome patterns, and visible award data.

• •Whether claimant was constructively or ordinarily dismissed
• •Effective date of termination
• •Whether dismissal was fair or unfair
• •Whether respondent treated some other substantial reason as sufficient reason for dismissal
• •Breach of contract claim for notice pay
• •Unlawful deduction from wages

The full source document is available from the official publication page.