Updated to include details of the increase in the maximum amount of a week's pay for calculating statutory redundancy pay, effective from 6 April 2017.
In Pujante Rivera v Gestora Clubs Dir, SL and another  IRLR 51 ECJ, the ECJ held that, where an employee resigns in response to the employer making unilateral changes to essential terms in the employment contract for reasons not related to the employee concerned, this will amount to a "redundancy" within the meaning of art.1(1)(a)(i) of the Collective Redundancies Directive (98/59/EC).
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has directed that a constructive dismissal resulting from the employer unilaterally reducing the employee's pay must be treated as a redundancy for the purposes of calculating when an employer's information and consultation obligations apply under the Collective Redundancies Directive.
James Buckley, Iain Naylor, Chris McAvoy and Lucy Sorell are associates and Mona Jackson is a trainee solicitor at Addleshaw Goddard LLP. They round up the latest rulings.
Victoria Bell is managing associate and Gerri Hurst, Carly Mather and Andrew Nealey are associates and Eleanor Cittern is a trainee solicitor at Addleshaw Goddard LLP.
The Court of Session has held that a dismissal that results from the expiry of a fixed-term contract does not automatically count towards the threshold for triggering collective redundancy consultation obligations.
Employment lawyer and XpertHR contributing author Laurie Anstis takes employers through the basics of a fair redundancy procedure.
In Packman t/a Packman Lucas Associates v Fauchon  IRLR 721 EAT, the EAT held that a dismissal will be by reason of redundancy where it is caused by an employer's need for employees to do less work of a particular kind, even if there is no change in the number of employees required.
In University of Stirling v University and College Union  IRLR 266 EAT, the EAT held that dismissals because of the expiry of fixed-term contracts were for a reason related to the employees concerned. Accordingly, they were not redundancy dismissals within the meaning of s.195 of TULR(C)A, and did not trigger the statutory duty on the employer to consult in respect of collective redundancies.
In holding that an employer did not fundamentally breach an employee's contract by failing to make her redundant, the Employment Appeal Tribunal has suggested that a redundancy situation will not arise where there is only a diminution in an employer's need for particular work to be carried out, rather than a reduction in the number of employees required to do that work.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to the definition of redundancy.