MR SCOTT DAVIS v Iodem Limited — 2022

Mr Scott Davis worked for Iodem Limited in investigations from 29 February 2016 and was on furlough from April 2020. The tribunal accepted that by August 2020 Iodem had no investigations work for him and that, on 21 August 2020, Mr Hawthorne told him the alternatives were a Medulaw role or redundancy. On 2 September 2020 Mr Davis declined the Medulaw role and, the following day, Iodem sent a letter giving notice of redundancy effective on 31 October 2020.

The tribunal found that 31 October 2020 was the effective date of termination and that redundancy was the reason for dismissal. However, it held that Iodem’s procedure was unfair because there was no real consultation and the decision-making position was effectively fixed from the outset. The tribunal also found that there was no viable alternative role in practice, so although the dismissal was unfair, the same outcome would have occurred in any event. It therefore made a 100% Polkey deduction and recorded that the redundancy payment already made meant there was no basic award.

On holiday pay, the tribunal held that Iodem had not given a valid and effective notice under regulation 15 of the Working Time Regulations 1998. The 3 September 2020 letter did not specify the days on which leave was to be taken and did not satisfy the timing requirements for notice covering 18.5 days. The tribunal therefore upheld the claim for unauthorised deductions from wages and awarded £2,052.46 for accrued but unpaid holiday pay.

Iodem admitted the failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars. The tribunal accepted Mr Davis’s evidence that he had repeatedly asked for one and been rebuffed, and said that the absence of any explanation, together with the respondent’s size and resources, justified a higher statutory award. It awarded three weeks’ pay, £1,614. The claim of automatic unfair dismissal was dismissed.