In the recent case of East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust v Levy [2018], the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) held that a letter from an employee giving one month's notice should not automatically be interpreted as a letter of resignation in the particular circumstances.
Ms Levy was employed as an administrator in the records department of one of the NHS Trust's hospitals. She received a conditional offer to transfer to a role in the radiology department. The next day, she gave her manager a letter that stated "Please accept one month's notice from the above date". Her manager responded on the same day, stating that he accepted her resignation, noting her last day in the records department and wishing her success with her future employment.
The following week, Ms Levy was told that the conditional offer for the role in the radiology department had been withdrawn due to her absence record. Upon being informed of this Ms Levy sought to withdraw her resignation from her records role, but was told that such withdrawal would be at her manager's discretion. Ms Levy's line manager would not accept the withdrawal of the resignation and completed a staff termination form without delay.
Ms Levy brought a claim for unfair dismissal. The Trust argued that Ms Levy had not been dismissed, but that she had resigned.
The Tribunal in the first instance decided that Ms Levy's letter was unclear; that it failed to identify whether notice was being given in respect of her previous role, but that she intended to transfer to the new department, or whether notice was simply to terminate her employment with the Trust. Even if the words had been clear and unambiguous, the Tribunal held that there were special circumstances in this case which meant the words had to be construed in light of the context of the case. The Trust appealed and the EAT rejected the appeal. Whilst giving notice usually clearly relates to the termination of employment, in these circumstances the NHS Trust had reasonably understood Ms Levy's notice to relate to her transfer to the radiology department only and not the termination of her employment. Ms Levy's manager had not treated her letter as if it was a resignation from employment with the Trust. His reply referred to the end of her work with the department (not the Trust) and he did not complete the staff termination form or deal with matters such as overtaken holiday until after he decided her resignation could not be withdrawn. Therefore on the facts the EAT held that the Tribunal was right to find that the Ms Levy had not resigned and Trust had dismissed her when it treated her notice as a valid resignation.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
