Cases6005904/2025

Claimant v The Sofa and Chair Company (in voluntary liquidation)

27 November 2025Before Employment Judge DowlingLondon Central

Outcome

Claimant succeeds£3,236

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalsucceeded

The respondent failed to establish a potentially fair reason for dismissal. The claimant was performing well (85% of target) and had never received any warnings. The dismissal was procedurally unfair as it came without notice and the employer had a pre-determined outcome with a dismissal letter prepared before the meeting. The respondent also failed to follow the ACAS Code.

Facts

Kanwaljit Bal worked as a sales executive for The Sofa and Chair Company from July 2021 to November 2024. She consistently performed well and was meeting around 85% of her sales target when she was dismissed on 28 November 2024. The dismissal came without warning - she had never received any verbal or written warnings. The company entered voluntary liquidation shortly after dismissing her. At what was described as a performance discussion meeting, the employer had already prepared a dismissal letter, showing a pre-determined outcome.

Decision

The tribunal found the dismissal was both substantively and procedurally unfair. The respondent failed to establish a potentially fair reason for dismissal given the claimant's good performance record. The dismissal was procedurally flawed as it came without any prior warnings and the outcome was predetermined. The respondent also failed to follow the ACAS Code. A basic award of £3,235.50 was ordered, payable from the National Insurance Fund due to the respondent's insolvency.

Practical note

Where an employer dismisses an employee without any prior warnings, with a pre-determined outcome, and fails to follow ACAS Code procedures, the dismissal will be both substantively and procedurally unfair even if the company is in financial difficulty.

Award breakdown

Basic award£3,236

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.94

Case details

Case number
6005904/2025
Decision date
27 November 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
retail
Represented
No

Employment details

Role
sales executive
Service
3 years

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
lay rep