What is a constructive dismissal for unfair dismissal laws?

“The leading authorities on constructive dismissal are Mohazab v Dick Smith Electronics Mohazab v Dick Smith Electronics Pty Ltd (No 2) (1995) 62 IR 200, 206., Australian Hearing v Peary Australian Hearing v Peary (2009) 185 IR 359, 367 [30]. and O’Meara v Stanley Works Pty Ltd O’Meara v Stanley Works Pty Ltd (2006) 58 AILR 100 [23].8 in Rheinberger v Huxley Marketing Pty Limited (1966) 67 IR 154.3 and in particular of Moore J, who was also one of the members of the Full Court in Mohazab, where his Honour stated:
“However it is plain from these passages that it is not sufficient to demonstrate that the employee did not voluntarily leave his or her employment to establish that there had been a termination of the employment at the initiative of the employer. Such a termination must result from some action on the part of the employer intended to bring the employment to an end and perhaps action which would, on any reasonable view, probably have had that effect. I leave open the question of whether a termination of employment at the initiative of the employer requires the employer to intend by its action that the employment will conclude. I am prepared to assume for present purposes that there can be a termination at the initiative of the employer if the cessation of the employment relationship is the probable result of the employer’s conduct.”
The Full Bench then go on to state at paragraph 23:
“[23] In our view the full statement of reasons in Mohazab, which we have set out together with the further explanation by Moore J in Rheinberger and the decisions of Full Benches of this Commission in Pawel v ABB Engineering, require that there to be some action on the part of the employer which is either intended to bring the employment to an end or has the probable result of bringing the employment relationship to an end. It is not simply a question of whether “the act of the employer resulted directly or consequentially in the termination of the employment” 4. Decisions which adopt the shorter formulation of the reasons for decision should be treated with some caution as they may not give full weight to the decision in Mohazab. In determining whether a termination was at the initiative of the employer an objective analysis of the employer’s conduct is required to determine whether it was of such a nature that resignation was the probable result or that the appellant had no effective or real choice but to resign.”
And see- Gonzalez v FQM Australia Nickel Pty Ltd (2015) FWC 6910 – 14 October 2015 per Bull DP