Millennium Communications Systems Ltd v. Laws [2001] UKEAT 816_01_0111 (1 November 2001)
The Tribunal was entitled to find that the employer failed to prove a genuine redundancy situation and acted unreasonably in dismissing Mr Laws. The evidence was ambivalent, and the employer did not satisfy the burden of proof. The Tribunal's refusal to apply a Polkey reduction was justified due to the absence of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2001] UKEAT 816_01_0111
- Parties
- Applicant: Mr M E Laws; Respondent: Millennium Communications Systems Ltd
- Jurisdiction
- United Kingdom
- Judgment Date
- 01 November 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Unfair Dismissal, Redundancy, Compensatory Award, Employment Rights Act 1996
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Mr M E Laws
Applicant
Millennium Communications Systems Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the dismissal of Mr Laws was unfair
- 2 Whether a genuine redundancy situation existed under section 139 of the Employment Rights Act 1996
- 3 Whether the Tribunal erred in law in its assessment of redundancy and procedural fairness
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal was entitled to find that the employer failed to prove a genuine redundancy situation and acted unreasonably in dismissing Mr Laws. The evidence was ambivalent, and the employer did not satisfy the burden of proof. The Tribunal's refusal to apply a Polkey reduction was justified due to the absence of any fair procedure. No error of law was found in the Tribunal's approach or conclusions.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal by Millennium Communications Systems Ltd is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment