(1) Mrs C Hart (2) Ms L Holbrook (3) Mrs E Holden (4) Ms N Lewis v Mr Mohammed Salman and 2 others — 2022

The tribunal found that no TUPE transfer had occurred from Mr Salman to Ms Rashid or Premier Supernews Ltd. It relied on the September 2019 Gumtree advert still being posted in Mr Salman’s name and on evidence that Premier Supernews Ltd appeared on a payslip before the alleged transfer date, and it therefore held that liability remained with Mr Salman.

On unfair dismissal, the tribunal rejected redundancy as the reason for the dismissals. It found that the store continued to operate in the same location and hours, that male staff were retained or added, that no proper selection pool was used, and that consultation was limited to a single meeting with Ms Holden followed by instructions to pass on the redundancy news. The tribunal concluded that the dismissals were because the respondent wanted full-time male staff and made stereotypical assumptions about women. Ms Holbrook, Ms Holden and Ms Lewis succeeded in ordinary unfair dismissal; Mrs Hart did not bring an ordinary unfair dismissal claim because she lacked sufficient continuity.

The tribunal upheld direct sex discrimination claims for all four claimants. It found facts from which discrimination could be inferred, including the comments attributed to Mr Hassan and Mr Salman’s text messages about wanting full-time staff and not wanting part-timers, and the respondent did not provide an adequate explanation. Mrs Hart’s pregnancy and maternity discrimination claim failed because the tribunal accepted that her dismissal was not because she was on maternity leave or seeking to exercise maternity leave rights.

Notice pay claims succeeded under s.86 ERA 1996 and holiday pay claims were dismissed because there was no evidence about the holiday year, days taken, or the shortfall claimed. In remedy, the tribunal awarded £6,500 injury to feelings to each claimant, with interest, and also awarded Mrs Hart £1,248 gross loss of earnings on her sex discrimination claim. Ms Holbrook received no compensatory award because she obtained new employment at the same wage, Ms Holden’s statutory redundancy payment was taken into account, and the tribunal revoked an oral 10% ACAS uplift in the written reasons because the Acas Code does not apply to redundancy dismissals. The written schedule gives a grand total of £41,724.84.