Claimant v Bellway Homes Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal heard evidence over four days and concluded that the dismissal was not unfair. The respondent's decision to make the claimant redundant was within the range of reasonable responses and the procedure followed was fair.
The tribunal found that the claimant was not selected for redundancy due to his disability. The selection was based on legitimate business reasons and there was no evidence that disability was a material factor in the decision-making process.
The tribunal determined that the respondent had not failed to make reasonable adjustments. Either no PCP was established that put the claimant at a substantial disadvantage, or the respondent had taken appropriate steps to make adjustments where required.
The claimant withdrew this claim relating to contriving a redundancy scheme due to his disability. The claim was dismissed upon withdrawal.
The claim relating to failure to provide itemised pay statements in respect of commission payments was withdrawn by the claimant and dismissed upon withdrawal.
Facts
The claimant, Mr Cronk, was made redundant by Bellway Homes Ltd and brought claims of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination. He alleged he was selected for redundancy due to his disability, that the redundancy scheme was contrived because of his disability, and that the respondent failed to make reasonable adjustments. He also raised issues regarding itemised pay statements for commission payments.
Decision
After a four-day hearing, the tribunal dismissed all the substantive claims. The tribunal found the dismissal was not unfair, the claimant was not selected for redundancy due to disability, and there was no failure to make reasonable adjustments. Two claims were withdrawn and dismissed upon withdrawal.
Practical note
A properly conducted redundancy process with legitimate business reasons will defeat claims of disability discrimination even where the claimant is disabled, provided the disability played no part in the selection decision.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2305673/2023
- Decision date
- 14 August 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 4
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- construction
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor