In Lomond Motors Ltd v Clark EATS/0019/09, the EAT held that an employment tribunal had erred in finding a dismissal unfair on the grounds that the redundancy selection pool had been incorrectly drawn. The tribunal had substituted its own view for that of a reasonable employer. The tribunal had further erred in its assessment of compensation.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that an employer's choice of who to include in a redundancy selection pool was within the range of reasonable responses because it was based on genuine, sound business reasons. Employers should be afforded a good deal of flexibility in the determination of the pool of selection for redundancy.
In Kachelmann v Bankhaus Hermann Lampe KG the European Court of Justice has ruled that it is not contrary to the EC Equal Treatment Directive for a redundancy selection process not to compare part-time workers with full-time workers.
An industrial tribunal's decision that an employer acted unreasonably in treating two fish-farming sites separately for the purposes of redundancy selection is upheld by the EAT in Highland Fish Farmers v Thorburn and another.
The materials and information included in the XpertHR service are provided for reference purposes only. They are not intended either as a substitute for professional advice or judgment or to provide legal or other advice with respect to particular circumstances. Use of the service is subject to our terms and conditions.