Count the heads — test for assessing whether there is a redundancy
The Tribunal in Servisair UK Ltd v O’Hare had decided that the claimants had been unfairly dismissed, rejecting the employer’s case that the reason for the dismissals was the potentially fair reason of redundancy.The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) overturned the decision because the Tribunal had applied the wrong test for establishing whether there has been a redundancy.
For unfair dismissal purposes, the question ‘is there a redundancy?’ has to be answered in two parts: is there a redundancy situation (business closure, workplace closure or diminished requirements of the business for employees to do work of a particular kind); and is the dismissal attributable, wholly or mainly, to that state of affairs?
The 10 claimants in Servisair UK Ltd v O’Hare worked as dispatchers in airline ground-handling services at Gatwick. In 2011, as a result of an estimated 34 per cent dip in the number of flights, the employer started consultation on a proposal to make 57 redundancies, with 47 alternative positions to be made available…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the Hogan Lovells briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
Sign in or Register to continue reading this article
It's quick, easy and free!
It takes just 5 minutes to register. Answer a few simple questions and once completed you’ll have instant access.Register now
Why register to The Lawyer
In-depth, expert analysis into the stories behind the headlines from our leading team of journalists.
Identify the major players and business opportunities within a particular region through our series of free, special reports.
Receive your pick of The Lawyer's daily and weekly email newsletters, tailored by practice area, region and job function.
More relevant to you
To continue providing the best analysis, insight and news across the legal market we are collecting some information about who you are, what you do and where you work to improve The Lawyer and make it more relevant to you.
News from Hogan Lovells
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Hogan Lovells
The decision of the US Court of Appeals has raised questions about how issuers should present their disclosures on conflict minerals under Exchange Act Rule 13p-1 and Form SD.
An interesting judgment was delivered by the Honourable J Majiki on 19 November 2013 in the Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth.
Analysis from The Lawyer
As international firms question their future in these small, closely linked markets, local lawyers too are eyeing the business environment with caution
Beyond the headline infrastructure projects, UK construction work is still recovering from the clobbering it took during the slump