Case 3308995/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Andy Pickett -counsel For the v Ms Courtney Step-Marsden - counsel — 2023
- Case reference
- 3308995/2022
- Decision date
- 13 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Daley
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Andy Pickett -counsel For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs Grace Reginiano worked as an administrator for the Anglo Israel Association from 2012 until her dismissal on 16 March 2022. The tribunal found that by late 2021 the trustees were concerned that the requirements for the claimant's work had diminished because of the Covid pandemic, the cancellation of the annual dinner, the move of the magazine to an online format, and uncertainty over the charity's finances following the death of a major donor. Applying section 139 ERA 1996 and the test in Safeway Stores plc v Burrell, the tribunal held that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy.
The tribunal rejected the claimant's attempt to advance a case that the real reason for dismissal was something else linked to her sister's suspension. It held that this allegation had not been set out in the ET1 and was therefore outside the scope of the claim. The tribunal also found, however, that it still had to decide whether there was a redundancy situation and whether the dismissal was fair under section 98(4) ERA 1996.
On fairness, the tribunal accepted that the respondent was a small charity with limited administrative resources, but it found some procedural shortcomings. The claimant was not told about the possibility of redundancy until 24 February 2022 despite earlier trustee discussions, the respondent pressed ahead with the consultation meeting on the same afternoon after she asked for more time, and the wording about who could accompany her was contradictory. The tribunal nevertheless concluded that those defects did not make the dismissal unfair. It accepted that Professor Hochhauser dealt with the appeal and grievance objectively, and it said that even if the process had been unfair, Polkey would have led to a 100% reduction because the claimant would have been dismissed in any event.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the dismissal was by reason of redundancy within section 139 ERA 1996 and that any procedural unfairness in the consultation did not make the dismissal unfair. It also held that the claimant's alternative allegation that she was dismissed for a different reason linked to her sister was outside the ET1. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- section 139 ERA 1996
- Safeway Stores plc v Burrell
- s.98(4) ERA 1996
- band of reasonable responses
- Iceland Frozen Foods v Jones
- Polkey v AE Dayton Services Ltd
- Chandok v Tirkey
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.