Claimant v Farringdon (T) Hairdressing Ltd T/a Toni&Guy — 2022

The claimant had worked in Toni & Guy branded salons since around 2003, but the tribunal found the earlier businesses were independent franchises and not part of the respondent's group. It held that his continuous service with the respondent began on 30 October 2010 under the signed contract. The tribunal also found that his move to the Farringdon salon in November 2019 was a permanent arrangement after a three-month trial, with no contractual right to return to Covent Garden.

After the Covid-19 closure of public-facing operations, the respondent placed the claimant at risk of redundancy and held several consultation meetings. The tribunal found there was a genuine redundancy situation, that the salon was to close permanently, and that the respondent consulted with the claimant, considered alternatives, and acted within the range of reasonable responses under section 98(4) ERA 1996. The claimant's appeal also failed on the same basis, including his argument that he had a right to return to Covent Garden.

The redundancy pay, notice pay and holiday pay claims were all dismissed. The tribunal found that the respondent used a weekly pay figure of £508.17, which was more generous than the statutory calculation and was adopted as a goodwill figure. It accepted that the claimant's final redundancy package included redundancy pay of £5,081.70, notice pay of £5,081.70 and holiday accrual of £1,930.97, so he had already been paid more than he was due under those heads.