From the series The Malta Employment Lawyer Explains – Article 8
The Difference Between Unfair And Constructive Dismissal
引言
Losing your job can be one of the most stressful experiences in your working life – especially if you feel that the decision was unjust or that you were left with no real choice but to resign. In employment law, these situations often fall under two key concepts: unfair dismissal and constructive dismissal.
Although the terms are often used interchangeably, they describe very different circumstances. Unfair dismissal typically involves an employer ending someone’s employment without a fair reason or proper procedure. Constructive dismissal, on the other hand, happens when an employee resigns because their employer’s behaviour has made their position untenable.
Unfair Dismissal
An employer has the right to terminate an employment contract, whether it is definite or indefinite, provided there is a good and sufficient cause. Although Maltese law does not define this term, it specifies certain reasons that do not qualify. Under Article 36(14) of the EIRA termination on grounds such as union membership, pregnancy or maternity leave, marriage, absence due to force majeure, whistleblowing, or initiating legal proceedings over employment rights violations does not constitute a good and sufficient cause.
Accordingly, if an employer dismisses an employee for any of these reasons—and not due to a valid cause, redundancy, or retirement at pensionable age – the dismissal is deemed unfair. The EIRA defines unfair dismissal as the termination of employment, after the probationary period, that is neither based solely on redundancy nor justified by good and sufficient cause. It also includes dismissals that, while appearing to be for valid reasons, are in fact discriminatory or connected to trade union activity or participation in a trade dispute.
Constructive Dismissal
Constructive dismissal occurs when an employee is effectively forced to resign because the employer’s actions make continued employment impossible or unreasonable. Although the resignation may appear voluntary on paper, the employee has no real alternative but to leave. In such cases, the resignation is treated as resulting from a unilateral and unlawful act by the employer, effectively amounting to a termination.
Common actions which may lead to constructive dismissal may include demotion, unilateral contract changes, harassment or bullying and the failure to address workplace issues.
Maltese law does not define constructive dismissal despite this being recognised by the Industrial Tribunal and the Maltese Courts. In fact, in Philip Camilleri vs Bortex Clothing Co. Ltd., decided on the 4思 February 2014, whereby the Industrial Tribunal stated “li ghalkemm mad-daqqa t’ghajn l-impjegat ikun telaq u irrizenja, hu fil-fatt dan il-pass ikun rizultat tal-fatt li min ihaddem ikun, irragonevolment, pogga lill-haddiem daru mall-hajt sal-punt li dan ma kellux triq ohra hlief dik li jitlaq. Ma jkunux kwistjonijiet frivoli izda serji sew.”
According to the Industrial Tribunal, determining whether an employee was forced to resign involves a dual test. The first is the contractual test, which examines whether the employer seriously breached the terms of employment. The breach must be so grave that the employee is left with no choice but to resign, as the employment relationship has been irreparably damaged. The second is the reasonableness test, which considers whether there has been a fundamental breach of trust between employer and employee. A clear absence of reason or any conduct by the employer that undermines mutual respect may amount to constructive dismissal.
Moreover, for a successful case of constructive dismissal, as reiterated in various caselaw, including Christopher Bonello vs OZO Services Limited decided on the 28思 of September 2023, the burden of proof rests on the employee who must additionally prove that:
- The employer’s actions fundamentally breached one of the employee’s contract’s express or implied terms; and
- The employee is forced to resigned directly due to the serious breach of terms; and
- The employee resigned immediately, almost instantly following the employer’s alleged breach in contract terms, as opposed to waiting too long prior to resigning.
Of course, these have to be assessed on a case-by-case basis, since not every act of the employer is serious enough to merit constructive dismissal.
Legal Remedies Available
In both cases of unfair and constructive dismissal, a complaint has to be filed with the Industrial Tribunal by the aggrieved employee within 4 months from the date of the alleged violation. When it comes to unfair dismissals, the burden of proof rests on the employer who must demonstrate that the dismissal was justified and based on a good and sufficient cause. This becomes even more difficult to prove in cases were there are no prior disciplinary warnings, either verbal or written, issued by the employer to the employee leading up to the dismissal. Conversely, when it comes to constructive dismissals, it is for the employee to bring forward enough evidence that his/her resignation was forced.
If the employee succeeds in a claim, the Tribunal may order reinstatement or re-engagement. If this is not requested or deemed appropriate, the Tribunal instead awards monetary compensation, payable directly by the employer to the dismissed employee. When determining compensation, the Tribunal considers the actual damages and losses suffered, as well as factors such as the employee’s age, skills, and future employment prospects. It also takes into account the duration of unemployment following the dismissal, the length of the employment relationship, and any reduction in earnings from subsequent employment.
结论
While both unfair dismissal and constructive dismissal deal with the end of an employment relationship, they arise from very different circumstances. Unfair dismissal occurs when an employer directly and unjustly terminates an employee’s contract, whereas constructive dismissal arises when the employer’s conduct effectively forces the employee to resign In both cases, the law aims to protect employees from abusive or unreasonable treatment, upholding fairness, mutual trust, and respect in the workplace. Employers must therefore act prudently, ensuring that all disciplinary and termination procedures are lawful, transparent, and supported by good and sufficient cause. Employees, in turn, should remain informed of their rights and the legal remedies available should they face unfair or coercive treatment.
本文仅供参考，不构成法律意见。所提供的信息反映了发布日期当时的法律状况。为了获取最新版本或针对您具体情况的建议，强烈建议您咨询律师。.
文章和研究由凯特琳·特纳女士完成，, 法学学士（荣誉）（马耳他）, ，目前正在马耳他大学攻读律师学硕士学位。.
Sciberras Advocates 由 Adrian Sciberras 博士创立，是一家总部位于马耳他的律师事务所。该事务所以其多学科、创新和灵活的特点而自豪，能够应对不断变化的时代以及本地和国际法律环境中的任何挑战。无论面临何种复杂私人或公司需求，Sciberras Advocates 都能提供切合实际且具有成本效益的法律解决方案，以实现您期望的结果。您可以通过电话联系 Sciberras Advocates： +35627795222或通过电子邮件发送至 [email protected].
