Claimant v Ace Employment Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
The claimant was dismissed without the respondent providing any potentially fair reason for dismissal. The respondent failed to attend the hearing or file a response in time, and therefore could not establish a fair reason under s.98 ERA 1996.
The claimant was dismissed without notice. The tribunal accepted the lay representative's submission that the claimant was entitled to one month's notice and awarded damages accordingly.
The whistleblowing claim related to a complaint made after dismissal concerning illegal immigrant employment. The tribunal found it lacked the necessary causal link between the protected disclosure and the detriment/dismissal, and therefore could not succeed.
The basic award for unfair dismissal duplicated the redundancy pay claim, so the separate redundancy claim was not awarded.
Facts
Mr Singh was employed as a warehouse worker from November 2021 to May 2024. He was dismissed on 10 May 2024 without notice. The respondent failed to file a response in time, failed to comply with tribunal directions, and did not attend the hearing despite assurances that settlement negotiations were underway. The claimant made a post-dismissal complaint about illegal immigrant employment which formed the basis of a whistleblowing claim.
Decision
The tribunal found the dismissal was unfair as the respondent failed to establish a potentially fair reason for dismissal. The claimant was awarded a basic award of £1,091.08 and one month's notice pay of £2,364.00 gross. The whistleblowing claim failed due to lack of causal link as the disclosure was made after dismissal.
Practical note
Respondents who fail to engage with tribunal proceedings and do not provide evidence of a fair reason for dismissal will face default judgments awarding unfair dismissal compensation, but whistleblowing claims require a causal link between disclosure and detriment that cannot exist where the disclosure post-dates dismissal.
Award breakdown
Award equivalent: 6.3 weeks' gross pay
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1306465/2024
- Decision date
- 24 April 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- other
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep
Employment details
- Role
- warehouse worker
- Salary band
- £25,000–£30,000
- Service
- 3 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No