Omar v Epping Forest District Citizens Advice
Omar v Epping Forest District Citizens Advice
Facts
In the midst of a heated argument with his management, the claimant tendered his resignation. After some time had passed, he made an attempt to rescind his resignation, claiming that he had done so in the "heat of the moment." The Respondent objected, and as a result, his position was terminated. The claimant claimed that they were dismissed unfairly. According to the findings of the employment tribunal, the Claimant had resigned.
Held
In light of the fact that the EAT did not agree with the rationale of the tribunal, the matter was sent back to a new tribunal. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) made use of the chance to examine the authorities on resignations made in the "heat of the moment" and provided the following advice, which is equally applicable to dismissals made in the "heat of the moment":
Following the successful delivery of a notice of resignation, it is not possible to unilaterally rescind the notice.
The words of resignation have to be evaluated in an impartial manner taking into account all of the facts of the situation.
The circumstances that may be taken into consideration include anything that would have had an impact on the manner in which the language that was used would have been construed by a reasonable bystander.
Although the recipient's subjective interpretation is crucial, it does not necessarily determine the outcome.
It is not sufficient if the party declares an intention to quit in the future; the reasonable bystander, who is in the situation of the receiver, must, based on the language used, perceive that the speaker is genuinely resigning from their post.
It is necessary for the reasonable bystander to have the impression that the resignation was "seriously meant," "really intended," or "conscious and rational." This is because the receiver is in its situation.
At the moment that the words were said, you need to determine whether or not they seem to have been "really intended" in a reasonable manner.
The information that pertains to what transpired thereafter is pertinent; but, the longer the time that has passed, the greater the likelihood that the evidence will be of a subsequent inadmissible change of mind (rather than of the purpose that was present at the time).
The fact that a case falls on one side or the other of the line is a matter of fact for the tribunal that is hearing the case.
Comment on Heat of the Moment Resignations
In the case of Omar v. Epping Forest District Citizens Advice, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) ruled that the employment tribunal made a mistake when it came to the conclusion that a claimant's resignation made in the "heat of the moment" should be accepted. The EAT also found that the panel's decision that the claimant could not pursue an unfair dismissal claim was erroneous.
