Mr A Elzaghdani v Concentrix CVG CMG UK Limited — 2020

The claimant did not attend the hearing and did not seek an adjournment. The Tribunal heard evidence from Mrs Brown and considered the claimant's email of 7 January 2020, together with the respondent's letter of 22 August 2019 warning of potential redundancy and a small additional bundle of documents.

Applying section 135 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the Tribunal noted that a redundancy payment is only payable where an employee is dismissed by reason of redundancy. It accepted Mrs Brown's evidence that the claimant resigned during the consultation period in order to take another position with Cisco, and the claimant's resignation letter was before the Tribunal.

At the time of resignation, the claimant had not been given notice that his contract would be terminated. The Tribunal also found that no redundancies ultimately took place, and that the other nine employees who had been warned of potential redundancies either accepted alternative employment or resigned. The claimant had been offered alternative employment but declined it, which he was entitled to do.

The Tribunal concluded that the respondent had not dismissed the claimant by reason of redundancy, or otherwise. Because the claimant himself terminated the employment by resigning, his claim for a redundancy payment was not well-founded and was dismissed.