The Claimant, who is disabled by reference to a mental impairment, worked as a teacher for the Respondent. He was suspended because of what he was told was a child protection matter and, after more than a year of disciplinary investigation, he resigned. He brought claims in the ET for unfair constructive dismissal and constructive dismissal amounting to disability discrimination, but the ET found that the Claimant had not been dismissed, and so the claims failed. The Claimant appealed, challenging (1) the ET's conclusions that he was not constructively dismissed, and hence the rejection of the unfair dismissal claim, (2) the rejection of the discriminatory constructive dismissal claim, and (3) the rejection of one of the claims of failure to comply with the duty of reasonable adjustment.

The EAT held that the ET had erred in relation to the first ground, meaning that the decision that the Claimant was not constructively dismissed and, for that reason, not unfairly dismissed could not stand; and the second ground, which rested on the same substantive challenges to the finding of constructive dismissal, also succeeded. As to the third ground of appeal, the EAT considered that the ET had erred in law by setting the bar too high. Accordingly, the EAT substituted its own finding that the Claimant had been constructively dismissed, and it remitted the matters of whether the constructive dismissal was discriminatory and the failure to make reasonable adjustments for reconsideration by the same ET.