The plaintiff, a veterinarian employed by the defendant clinic for approximately 20 years, brought an action claiming wrongful or constructive dismissal.
The dispute arose after a client's partner made threats to clinic staff following the escape of a cat, leading the plaintiff to refuse to return to work unless the employer sent a formal client termination letter.
The employer refused to send the letter, believing it would inflame the situation, and instead implemented other security measures and requested the plaintiff return her keys.
The court held that the employer's safety measures were reasonable and the plaintiff's demand was unnecessary, meaning her refusal to return to work constituted a de facto resignation.
Accordingly, the action and all associated claims for moral and human rights damages were dismissed.
