Mrs Anjum Sarah v Aetos Capital Group (UK) Ltd — 2021

Mrs Anjum Sarah was employed as an accountant from 10 March 2016 until her dismissal on 20 August 2019. The respondent said the dismissal was by reason of redundancy. The tribunal accepted that a redundancy situation existed, but found that the process used to dismiss the claimant was not fair.

The tribunal preferred the claimant's account of the 16 July 2019 meeting to that of Mr Ting Ji. It found that she was told, in substance, that dismissal had already been decided and that a replacement had effectively been identified, rather than being engaged in a genuine consultation. The tribunal also found that the requirement for the combined role to include Mandarin was not a real operational requirement, but a device to justify the dismissal.

The tribunal held that the respondent failed to carry out a fair redundancy selection process, failed to consult meaningfully, and failed to consider suitable alternative employment properly. It found that, had a fair process been followed, the claimant had at least a 50% chance of remaining in employment and that a reasonable salary for the combined role would have been £40,000.

On remedy, the tribunal assessed a basic award of £1,575, but that was offset by the redundancy payment and therefore resulted in no net basic award. The compensatory award included £250 for loss of statutory rights, £50 for job-search expenses, £23,053.32 for nine months' net loss of earnings, and £459 for medical insurance contributions. After the 50% reduction for the chance of a fair dismissal, and deductions for later earnings of £3,990.75 and £472.50 from the redundancy payment, the compensatory award was £7,442.91. The Recoupment Regulations applied, with the prescribed sum stated as £7,442.91 and the prescribed period running from 1 March 2020 to 30 September 2020.