Mr C Kelly, Counsel v Respondent — 2021

The claimant, Ms S Panesar, was employed by Brookfield Drinks Limited from 1 July 2014 as Financial Controller. The respondent said her dismissal on 22 October 2019 was by reason of redundancy, alternatively for some other substantial reason. The tribunal heard evidence from Ms Panesar and Mr McNally, found that Mr McNally had been in discussions about appointing Mr Coogan as Director of Finance before the redundancy process began, and accepted that the claimant’s workload had increased because of staffing changes and errors in accounting entries.

On redundancy, the tribunal found that the respondent was continuing to carry out the claimant’s work through a different person and that Mr McNally’s own business case described a combination of the Finance Controller and Finance Director roles into a new Director of Finance role. It therefore found that the requirements of the business for employees to carry out work of a particular kind had not ceased or diminished. The tribunal concluded that the claimant was being replaced by Mr Coogan and that the stated redundancy reason was not made out.

On some other substantial reason, the tribunal found that the respondent had not shown that this was the principal reason for dismissal. It criticised the lack of a defined job description, the absence of any comparison between the claimant and Mr Coogan, and the absence of disclosed financial evidence supporting any asserted need for change. It also found that the claimant had been placed at a disadvantage by being told of an interview after she had been signed off sick, being asked to attend while unfit for work because of stress, and being given only three days to appeal.

Applying section 98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and relying on Newbound v Thames Water Utilities Ltd [2015] IRLR 734, the tribunal held that the dismissal was unfair. It found that Mr McNally had no intention of doing anything other than dismiss the claimant from the point he first contacted Michael Page, and that the process was used to replace her with Mr Coogan. The judgment does not record any remedy award in the extracted text.