Why Was I the Only One Considered for Redundancy?
Based on: Valimulla v Al-Khair Foundation [2023] EAT 131 · View judgment
The Scenario
A fundraiser was placed in a pool of one for redundancy during the pandemic, despite three colleagues doing the same role in other regions.
The Conversation
This is how Case Buddy would handle this scenario — the same experience you get on the platform.
You
Case Buddy
You
Case Buddy
The Correct Legal Position
- •For a redundancy dismissal to be fair under s.98(4) ERA 1996, the employer must follow a fair procedure including meaningful consultation.
- •Where an employee is placed in a pool of one, the employer must consult on the question of pooling — why they were singled out.
- •Consultation meetings are not meaningful if they do not address the pooling decision.
- •Failure to consult on pooling renders the dismissal procedurally unfair.
What the Court Decided
The EAT held the dismissal was unfair because the employer failed to consult on why the claimant was in a pool of one. Compensation of over £16,000 was ordered.
Important: This case study is for educational purposes only. Case Buddy provides legal information, not legal advice. Every situation is different — for advice specific to your circumstances, consult a qualified solicitor. Free advice is available from Shelter (housing), ACAS (employment), and StepChange (debt).
Facing a similar situation?
Describe your situation to Case Buddy and get free legal information tailored to your facts.
Start a Free CaseStay informed
Get legal tips and Case Buddy updates delivered to your inbox.