Claimant v Sopra Steria Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
Multiple allegations relating to fairness of redundancy dismissal remain live after preliminary hearing, including alleged failures to provide information on redundancy payment calculation during consultation. Several procedural unfairness allegations were withdrawn or struck out, but core claims about consultation adequacy remain for full hearing.
Claim for enhanced redundancy payment (valued at approximately £180,000) withdrawn by claimant at preliminary hearing as she intends to pursue it in another jurisdiction, as only £25,000 can be recovered in employment tribunal.
Claim for payment for accrued TOIL (time off in lieu) on termination proceeds to full hearing. Claimant alleges oral contractual variation on 29 March 2023 that her TOIL would be 'protected' and paid on redundancy, with consideration being her agreement to work beyond April 2023 termination date.
Claim for unpaid notice pay from 16 May to 26 May 2023 proceeds to full hearing. Claimant alleges she was given notice of redundancy on 3 March 2023 which should have expired on 26 May 2023 but was only paid until 16 May 2023, based on alleged oral agreement with HR.
Claim for holiday pay that would have been accrued if notice period had been worked was withdrawn by the claimant at the preliminary hearing.
Statutory redundancy payment claim remains live. Claimant received redundancy notice on 3 March 2023 and alleges failures in the redundancy consultation process including late provision of accurate redundancy payment figures (initial estimate £256,000 later reduced to actual figure of £118,000 provided only two days before termination).
Facts
Claimant was made redundant by respondent IT services company. She was given notice on 3 March 2023 and her employment ended on 16 May 2023. During redundancy consultation she was initially given an estimated total pension figure of £256,000 as part of her redundancy package, but only received the accurate lower figure of £118,000 two working days before her originally understood termination date of 30 April 2023. The claimant alleges this and other failures to provide information during consultation rendered the dismissal unfair. She also brings breach of contract claims for TOIL payment and notice pay based on alleged oral contractual variations.
Decision
This was a preliminary hearing on respondent's strike out/deposit order application. The tribunal dismissed several unfair dismissal allegations on withdrawal and struck out two allegations for lack of reasonable prospects of success due to non-compliance with orders for further particulars. However, the tribunal refused to strike out the core unfair dismissal allegations about lack of information during redundancy consultation, and the breach of contract claims for TOIL and notice pay, finding these involved factual disputes requiring determination at full hearing.
Practical note
Tribunals will not strike out redundancy fairness claims based on alleged failures in consultation where there are genuine factual disputes about the adequacy and timing of information provided, even where a litigant in person's pleadings require clarification.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2411365/2023
- Decision date
- 18 November 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- technology
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No