Case 6016204/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Ferris v City of York Council Heard at Leeds — 2025
- Case reference
- 6016204/2024
- Decision date
- 30 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Miller Members
- Venue
- Leeds
- Panel members
- Miss L Fawcett, Mr M Brewer
Parties
2 namedMr N Ferris
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThree-member tribunal sitting in Leeds heard the claimant's claim for a statutory redundancy payment against City of York Council under part XI of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The parties agreed the claimant (Corporate Director for Place) was dismissed by reason of redundancy on 27 August 2024; the only issue was whether he had unreasonably refused an offer of suitable alternative employment under s.141(2) and (3) ERA 1996.
The tribunal refused to admit purported expert evidence from a third party with no involvement in the redundancy process (applying De Keyser Limited v Wilson [2001] IRLR 324 and noting the matter was for the tribunal). It found that the offered role of Director of City Development was not suitable alternative employment: it represented a clear reduction in status amounting to a demotion (the claimant would no longer be a Corporate Director, would sit as a peer to his former direct reports, and would have a substantially reduced scope of responsibility), and there was a 10% pay cut. The tribunal noted any reasonable person would consider their role in the organisation diminished, and the change would impact the claimant's future career prospects in a small senior local-government job market.
As the tribunal found the offer was not suitable, it could not also conclude the claimant unreasonably refused (although it observed that, had the role been suitable, the claimant's complete disengagement from the consultation process might have made his refusal unreasonable). Pursuant to s.163 ERA 1996, with 10 complete years' service at age 55 and earnings well above the statutory cap, the claimant was entitled to 1.5 weeks' pay at £700 per week per complete year, totalling £10,500.
Claims and outcomes
1 claim adjudicated| Claim type | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Upheld | — | £10,500 |
Legal tests applied
5 referencesRemedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,500
Source document
Primary recordThe full judgment is available 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.