Case 2415327/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L Morrison v Fairway Lodge Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2415327/2020
- Decision date
- 29 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Slater
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr L Morrison
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the Manchester hearing on 11 and 12 October 2021, Employment Judge Slater sitting alone found that the claimant had been employed at Fairways Lodge from 1 August 2012 and that his continuity of employment was preserved through a TUPE transfer. The tribunal found that the hotel business remained a stable economic entity providing rooms and leisure facilities after 4 September 2018, initially under Mr Chohan and then, on or shortly after 9 October 2018, under the respondent company. On that basis, the claimant had eight years' continuous service when his employment ended on 7 August 2020.
The tribunal held that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy because the respondent no longer needed a full-time bar person in the circumstances of the pandemic and the limited reopening of the hotel. It accepted that a pool of one was within the range of a reasonable process on the facts, but found the dismissal unfair because the claimant was given no prior consultation and was not asked about alternatives such as reduced hours or other duties. The unfair dismissal complaint was therefore well-founded.
The tribunal also held that the claimant was entitled to a statutory redundancy payment and that the respondent was in breach of contract because it did not give the eight weeks' notice required by his length of service. He was paid three weeks in lieu. The unpaid wages complaint for April 2020 was withdrawn by the claimant and dismissed on withdrawal. After the liability decision, the parties reached a remedy settlement by consent, and the respondent was ordered to pay £9,500 in settlement of all the claimant's successful complaints.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant had sufficient continuous service via TUPE to bring the claim. It held that the dismissal was by reason of redundancy but unfair because there was no prior consultation and no discussion of alternatives. | Upheld | — | — |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant had more than two years' continuous employment, preserved through the transfer, and was therefore entitled to a statutory redundancy payment based on eight years' service. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was entitled to eight weeks' notice because of eight years' service, but he was only paid three weeks in lieu. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claimant withdrew the unpaid wages complaint in respect of April 2020, and the tribunal dismissed it on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,500
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
6 references- regulation 3(1)(a) TUPE 2006
- Cheesman guidelines
- Whitewater Leisure Management Ltd v Barnes
- section 210(5) ERA 1996
- section 98(4) ERA 1996
- band of reasonable responses
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.