George v Ferrabyrne Ltd (Southampton) (Case No 1400419/2017) (24 August 2017, unreported) (with thanks to Case Editor Barnaby Large)
G was dismissed under the guise of redundancy for reasons connected with an impending PI claim he was bringing and personal conflict. A genuine redundancy situation nevertheless existed, and it was found that G was part of a pool of six, one of whom would inevitably have to be dismissed. The tribunal could neither conclude with sufficient certainty that G would or would not have been dismissed fairly in any event. Given the procedural and substantive flaws in the redundancy process, it had no clear basis to precisely calculate a Polkey deduction and consequently found each employee had an equal chance (one-in-six) of being dismissed, reducing G's compensatory award by 16.67%.
Marsh v First 4 Direct Mail Ltd (Manchester) (Case No 2402759/2017) (29 December
View full volume
CONTACT US
