England and Wales Case Law

Donald Gormley v Phoenix Business Solutions (UK) Limited

The Employment Tribunal erred in law by dismissing the unfair dismissal claim despite clear findings of procedural unfairness; the only available conclusion was that the appellant was unfairly dismissed. However, the ET made sufficient factual findings to support its limited compensatory award, and its decision on wrongful dismissal was not in error of law as the breach was fundamental.

Source excerpt

• Redundancy
• Unfair dismissal
• Wrongful dismissal
• Contract of employment
• Remedies for unfair dismissal

Read case analysis

Dr Beaulah Banfield v Stanmore College

High Court employment dispute over redundancy, contracts and data protection. The court set aside an interim injunction, refused summary judgment and strike out, and transferred the case to Part 7.

• Redundancy
• Breach of employment contract
• Summary judgment
• Strike out
• Injunctions
• Contempt of court

Read case analysis

Banfield v Stanmore College

Banfield v Stanmore College [2026] EWHC 617 (KB) (13 March 2026)

The High Court held that this employment dispute was unsuitable for Part 8, set aside an interim injunction staying redundancy, refused summary judgment and strike-out, and transferred the case to Part 7.

• Redundancy
• Breach of employment contract
• Summary judgment
• Strike out
• Injunctions
• Data protection

Read case analysis

Micro Focus Limited v James Mildenhall

The EAT allowed Micro Focus’s appeal in part, finding errors in the tribunal’s s.188 redundancy consultation analysis and de facto employer reasoning.

• Redundancy
• Collective consultation
• Unfair dismissal
• Protective award
• Collective-consultation
• Protective-award

Read case analysis

K Davies v Oscar Mayer Ltd

An Employment Tribunal found Mr Davies’ dismissal unfair after an inadequate investigation into alleged racial harassment, but reduced compensation by 15% for contributory fault.

• Unfair dismissal
• Racial harassment
• Procedural fairness
• Disciplinary procedures
• Redundancy
• Contributory fault

Read case analysis

Hendy Group Ltd v Daniel Kennedy

The employer failed to take any reasonable steps to consider or facilitate alternative employment for the claimant, and this failure rendered the dismissal unfair. The Tribunal was entitled to find that, had proper steps been taken, the claimant would likely have secured alternative employment, justifying no Polkey reduction.

Source excerpt

• Unfair dismissal
• Redundancy
• Alternative employment
• Remedy
• Polkey reduction

Read case analysis

S Mogane v Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (No 2)

Enhanced redundancy payments actually received must be deducted in full from the compensatory award after any Polkey reduction, and not pro-rated; compensation cannot include amounts not lost by the claimant.

Source excerpt

• Unfair dismissal
• Redundancy
• Compensatory award
• Polkey reduction
• Enhanced redundancy payment

Read case analysis

L Humby v Barts Health NHS Trust

The Tribunal erred in law by refusing amendment applications on a mistaken basis, failing to recognise a continuing act for time purposes, misapplying the burden of proof and detriment tests, failing to consider all evidence in the round, wrongly finding affirmation, and not properly addressing whether unilateral demotion and pay reduction constituted a fundamental breach of contract. The trial was rendered unfair due to interruptions in cross-examination. The judgment was not saved by findings on fairness of dismissal; the case must be remitted for rehearing.

Source excerpt

• Constructive dismissal
• Victimisation
• Discrimination
• Redundancy
• Contract variation
• Time limits

Read case analysis

L. Marshall v East & North Hertfordshire NHS Trust

The EAT allowed the appeal in part, remitting an overlooked section 15 Equality Act issue, but upheld the tribunal’s dismissal of the redundancy fairness challenge.

• Disability discrimination
• Redundancy
• Suitable alternative employment
• Unfair dismissal
• Protected disclosure detriment
• Disability-discrimination

Read case analysis

Rafiqul Islam v Loomis UK Ltd

The Tribunal, although not expressly referencing section 136 Equality Act 2010 or judicial guidance, in substance considered whether the claimant had made out a prima facie case of discrimination and concluded he had not. The statistical evidence relied upon by the claimant was not capable of shifting the burden of proof, and no error of law was disclosed by the Tribunal's approach.

Source excerpt

• Religion or belief discrimination
• Redundancy
• Burden of proof
• Direct discrimination

Read case analysis