Zero-hours pastry chef loses unfair dismissal claim after tribunal finds no dismissal occurred
A pastry chef on a zero-hours contract claimed she was verbally dismissed during a 10-minute meeting, but the tribunal found no dismissal took place and struck out her claims.
1 min read · Last updated 19 May 2026
Case details
- #zero-hours-contract
- #sickness-absence
- #verbal-dismissal
- #credibility-finding
- #struck-out
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a pastry chef on a zero-hours contract from 13 February 2020.
- The claimant had been absent from work for several weeks due to back pain and had attended her son's wedding during a period of unauthorised absence.
- A meeting took place on 3 May 2022 between the claimant and Mr Bidarbakht; no notes were taken.
- The claimant alleged she was verbally dismissed at that meeting, but the tribunal found she was not dismissed.
- The tribunal found the claimant not credible and Mr Bidarbakht credible, concluding no dismissal occurred.
- The claimant's claims for unfair dismissal, disability discrimination, redundancy pay, notice pay, and holiday pay were struck out for lack of jurisdiction.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant commenced employment as a pastry chef on a zero-hours contract.
-
Message about absence
Mr Bidarbakht sent a message asking about the claimant's long-term plans due to inconsistent attendance.
-
Claimant said she would return
Claimant messaged that she would be back at work on Monday; Mr Bidarbakht asked her to come see him on Tuesday.
-
Meeting with Mr Bidarbakht
Meeting held in Mr Bidarbakht's office lasting about 10 minutes; claimant alleges she was dismissed, but tribunal found no dismissal.
-
Claimant asked for update
Claimant sent a text asking for an update; no reply received.
-
Claimant asked for written dismissal
Claimant sent a text asking for written confirmation of dismissal; no reply.
-
Final text from claimant
Claimant sent a text asking for written reasons for dismissal; no reply.
-
Preliminary hearing
Public preliminary hearing to determine whether claimant was dismissed; tribunal found she was not dismissed.
-
Judgment issued
Employment Judge Bansal issued judgment striking out claims for lack of jurisdiction.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was verbally dismissed at a meeting on 3 May 2022, and if not, whether her claims should be struck out for lack of jurisdiction.
The outcome
The tribunal decided that the claimant was not dismissed and remains an employee of Damask Catering Limited. The key reason was that the tribunal found the claimant not credible and preferred the evidence of Mr Bidarbakht, who denied dismissing her. As a result, all her claims—unfair dismissal, disability discrimination, redundancy pay, notice pay, and holiday pay—were struck out for lack of jurisdiction.
- No compensation awarded as the claims were struck out.
Lessons & takeaways
- If you believe you have been verbally dismissed, try to get written confirmation or record the conversation to support your case.
- Zero-hours workers have the same protection from unfair dismissal as other employees, but you must show that a dismissal actually happened.
- Tribunals place significant weight on credibility; inconsistent evidence or failure to comply with orders can undermine your case.
- Keep copies of all communications with your employer, including texts and emails, to prove what was said or agreed.
A dispute over a 10-minute meeting
This case shows how difficult it can be to prove a verbal dismissal, especially when there are no witnesses or notes. The claimant, a pastry chef on a zero-hours contract, alleged she was dismissed during a brief meeting with her boss on 3 May 2022. She had been absent from work due to back pain and had attended her son's wedding during that period. The meeting lasted about 10 minutes, and no notes were taken. The claimant said she was told she was 'finished', while the employer denied saying anything of the sort.
Credibility was key
The tribunal had to decide who to believe. The claimant had not complied with case management orders to provide witness statements or disclosure, and her representative struggled to produce evidence. The employer, represented by counsel, provided a witness statement and gave consistent evidence. Employment Judge Bansal found the claimant not credible and Mr Bidarbakht credible, concluding that no dismissal took place. This meant the claimant remained an employee, and all her claims—including unfair dismissal and disability discrimination—were struck out for lack of jurisdiction.
What this means for similar claims
For employees on zero-hours contracts, this case is a reminder that the burden of proof lies on you to show a dismissal happened. Without clear evidence—such as a written note, a recording, or a credible witness—a tribunal may side with the employer. The case also highlights the importance of complying with tribunal orders and preparing evidence thoroughly. If you believe you have been dismissed verbally, seek advice quickly and gather any supporting documentation to strengthen your case.
Similar cases
Zero-hours security officer loses unfair dismissal claim over COVID test site removal
A tribunal struck out a security officer's unfair dismissal claim because she was not an employee and had not been dismissed, highlighting the limits of employment rights for casual workers.
Black psychiatric nurse passed over for dual diagnosis lead role: race and sex discrimination upheld
A Black African community psychiatric nurse with 15 years' service was found to have been discriminated against when two white female colleagues were appointed to a specialist lead role he was qualified for. The tribunal upheld his claims of direct race and sex discrimination and harassment.
Support worker dismissed after 6 months' sick leave: employer's decision upheld
A support worker with depression was dismissed after six months' sick leave. The tribunal upheld the dismissal, finding the council acted reasonably and proportionately.
Café manager with 17 years' service unfairly dismissed after redundancy and missed vacancy
A café manager with 17 years' service was unfairly dismissed when her employer failed to inform her of a sales assistant vacancy during redundancy consultation. The tribunal awarded £560.28 after applying a 66.7% Polkey reduction.