Claimant v Royal Mail Group Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the dismissal was unfair. The judgment specifically states there was no chance the claimant would have been fairly dismissed in any event, indicating fundamental procedural or substantive failures by the respondent.
The tribunal found the complaint relating to holiday pay was well founded and succeeded, indicating the respondent failed to pay holiday entitlement owed to the claimant.
The tribunal found the complaint of victimisation was not well-founded and dismissed it, meaning the claimant failed to establish that they were subjected to detriment because of a protected act.
Facts
Mr Jafrate was employed by Royal Mail Group Limited and was dismissed. He brought claims for unfair dismissal, breach of contract relating to holiday pay, and victimisation. The case was heard over four days via remote video hearing in Manchester, with the claimant representing himself and the respondent represented by a solicitor.
Decision
The tribunal found the unfair dismissal claim succeeded with no possibility of a fair dismissal in any event (0% Polkey reduction). The breach of contract claim for holiday pay also succeeded. However, the victimisation claim was dismissed as not well-founded.
Practical note
Self-represented claimants can successfully challenge dismissals by major employers, and tribunals will not apply Polkey reductions where procedural failures are fundamental.
Case details
- Case number
- 2404474/2023
- Decision date
- 24 April 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 4
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- transport
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No