Mr J. Dunderdale v Intertek Testing Management Limited — 2019

Mr J. Dunderdale worked for Intertek Testing Management Limited from 4 April 2011 until 31 December 2018 as a Global Indirect Tax Specialist. The tribunal found that the respondent had reviewed its tax structure and concluded that it no longer required a UK-based central VAT specialist, because VAT support was to be devolved to the regions with external advisers where needed. It accepted that this created a genuine redundancy situation and rejected the claimant's case that he was dismissed because his 'face did not fit'.

The tribunal held that it was reasonable to treat the claimant as a pool of one, because he was the only person carrying out that role. It also found that the consultation began at a reasonable point after Mr Deasy and Ms Syed had worked up the proposal and consulted regional CFOs, and that the claimant was given clear warning on 21 November 2018, followed by consultation meetings on 3 and 18 December 2018. The tribunal accepted that he was given an opportunity to comment on the business case and the proposed restructuring.

The unfairness arose in relation to alternative employment. The claimant was encouraged to consider the new Project/Operational Tax Manager role and was told that he could apply, but at the second consultation meeting Mr Deasy effectively told him that the other candidates were better qualified and that it would probably not be a good use of his time to pursue the role. The tribunal found that this lacked transparency and meant the claimant was not properly considered for the new role in the way that had been described to him. Liability for unfair dismissal was therefore upheld, while the Polkey question and remedy were left to a later hearing; the tribunal said the chances of the claimant being appointed may not have been high, but it had not reached a final view on that issue.