This point is of interest (well to me at least)
“What happens if the clubs cannot agree an adequate amount of compensation?
If the manager moves between clubs and the clubs cannot agree on an adequate amount of compensation then due to the early termination of the contract the original club will be able to bring the following claims:
Breach of contract – by the manager
Inducement to breach the contract – by the club obtaining his services
It is likely that both these claims are to be heard by a disciplinary tribunal which will decide on the adequate amount of compensation to be paid.”
This presupposes that there is a fixed term contract which does not have any provision allowing either one, or both, of the parties to terminate the contract by giving a short period of notice (eg 1 week)
It seems to me that much of the debate on this thread, and the resulting differences in opinion, depend upon whether there is (or was if it has been terminated) a term in the contract between Blyth and AA allowing the contract to be terminated by a short period of notice.
I do not know what the provisions of the contract are so clearly cannot express any view on who is right or wrong but I think it is probably common ground that
1. If there is a term allowing the contract to be terminated by the employee giving 1 week notice then it is being validly terminated and there is no breach
2. If there is no such term then purporting to terminate the contract (if it is still subsisting at the time of giving such notice*) is, all other things being equal, likely to amount to a breach of contract rather than a valid (I.e. without breaking the terms and conditions) termination. This could give rise to a claim as indicated in the passage from the article posted by Philly.
3. One post indicates that no court would refuse to accept that a contract was terminated by the giving of notice. I think this is correct in, and to the extent that, no court would ever order an employee to continue under a contract when he or she has “resigned” and refused to return to the job in question. (Though I do seem to remember that in extremely rare cases, which need not really concern us here even if they are still valid law, courts have made such orders i.e. to continue with or grant an order for specific performance of the contract) but even if this never happens the fact that there has been a “resignation” does not preclude claims for damages for breach of contract or indeed the tort of inducement to breach of contract mentioned in the article above. Such claims can be decided by a tribunal but they might also be decided by a court.
On the specific circumstances of this case it seems to me that we have had some very experienced professionals dealing with the recruitment and selection process so I would be extremely surprised if they failed to check, and clear, the contractual position before making the appointment.
Note * We do not know what if anything occurred between Blyth and AA prior to the handing in of notice.
Apologies for long rambling post. I thought I was going to be brief and snappily to the point when I started this.