Claimant v Rowena House Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
Tribunal found insufficient evidence to support the unfair dismissal claim. While the claimant was dismissed in a redundancy situation when the care home closed, there was dispute about his attendance during the final months and no evidence provided regarding consultation failures. The tribunal noted that the Redundancy Payment Service operates a process to compensate for statutory redundancy payment.
The claim was entirely unclear. According to the claim form, the second respondent (Ms Cader) was of the same ethnic origin as the claimant. No further information was provided about specific acts of discrimination. Employment Judge Evans had previously requested identification of acts of discrimination but no response was received.
The basis of the age discrimination complaint was completely obscure. No specific acts or evidence were identified. Despite tribunal requests to identify acts of discrimination, no response was received from the claimant.
The basis of the sex discrimination complaint was completely obscure. No specific acts or evidence were identified, and the claimant failed to respond to tribunal requests to clarify the allegations.
The tribunal noted that the Redundancy Payment Service had already dealt with this, providing approximately £1,400-£1,500. No documentary evidence of this process was provided, and the dispute about salary levels did not establish entitlement to additional redundancy pay.
The claimant alleged that Ms Cader under-declared his salary to HMRC but confirmed he received approximately £30,000 per year throughout his employment with no shortfall in wages, save possibly for occasional unpaid incentives which could not be quantified. No evidence of actual wage deductions was provided.
The claim mentioned entitlement to holiday pay, but this would have been dealt with by the Redundancy Payment Service. No separate evidence of outstanding holiday pay was provided.
The claim mentioned notice pay and arrears. These matters would have been addressed through the Redundancy Payment Service claim which resulted in payment of approximately £1,400-£1,500. No further evidence of breach was provided.
Facts
Mr Koonjbeharee worked as a Team Leader at Rowena House, a care home, for over four years. He was made redundant when the care home closed in October 2023 and the company went into voluntary liquidation in November 2023. The claimant alleged he worked 52-60 hours per week for approximately £30,000 annually, but that the employer under-declared his salary to HMRC. He claimed unfair dismissal by text and discrimination on grounds of age, race and sex. The respondent stated he was absent from work from 21 July 2023 onwards. The home had been rated inadequate by CQC in all respects.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed all claims due to lack of supporting evidence. The claimant failed to comply with directions to exchange documents and witness statements, and failed to respond to requests to identify specific acts of discrimination. The respondent did not appear. The tribunal decided it was not in the interests of justice to adjourn again given two previous preliminary hearings and limited prospects of enforcement against a company in liquidation.
Practical note
Unrepresented claimants must comply with tribunal directions to provide evidence and particularise claims, especially discrimination allegations; mere assertion without supporting documentation will result in dismissal even where the respondent does not participate.
Legal authorities cited
Case details
- Case number
- 2300022/2024
- Decision date
- 22 September 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- healthcare
- Represented
- No
Employment details
- Role
- Team Leader
- Salary band
- £30,000–£40,000
- Service
- 4 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No