Bournemouth University Higher Education Corporation v Buckland: Re-establishing Orthodoxy at the Expense of Coherence?
英国上诉法院审理了一起大学教师因考试评分争议而主张推定解雇的案件，探讨雇主能否通过补救行为治愈毁约性违约，以及普通法与成文法在推定解雇领域的复杂关系。
In Bournemouth University Higher Education Corporation v Buckland,1 the Court of Appeal grappled with various puzzles thrown up by the often fraught relationship between common law and statute in the sphere of constructive dismissal. The facts are simply stated. Following a high failure rate in examinations marked by Professor Buckland, re-marking of failed papers occurred without consulting either Professor Buckland or the second marker. After a circuitous and rather irregular series of paper re-marks, some of the failed papers eventually had their marks raised by the examination board. Although a University inquiry into these events was critical of the examination process, Professor Buckland was not placated. He resigned and claimed that he had been constructively dismissed. One aspect of the puzzle was the extent to which an employer could cure a repudiatory breach of contract by remedial conduct—in this case, the holding of the University inquiry—so as to...