Claimant v Your Housing Group Limited

Outcome

Facts

The claimant was employed as ICT Business Partner and was made redundant on 6 April 2023. She was informed her role was at risk in January 2023 and attended consultation meetings. She raised a grievance alleging the redundancy was 'engineered' and that consultation was inadequate. After delays in the grievance process, and with a new job starting on 11 April 2023, the claimant requested that her final consultation meeting be expedited and indicated she no longer wanted to pursue part of her grievance. The respondent says her request to leave amounted to 'some other substantial reason' justifying dismissal. The claimant says she was forced into this position by respondent delays.

Decision

The tribunal refused the respondent's application to strike out the claimant's unfair dismissal claim. The judge found that there were core disputes of fact about whether there was a genuine redundancy, whether the claimant truly requested dismissal or was forced into it by delays, whether suitable alternative roles were offered, and whether the consultation and grievance processes were fair. These disputes could only be resolved at a full hearing. The judge also held that even if the claimant had limited financial loss, the claim should not be struck out because vindication through a finding of unfair dismissal has value.

Practical note

Legal authorities cited