Gymnastics coach awarded £2,230 after redundancy dismissal without consultation
A gymnastics coach who was dismissed by email with immediate effect citing redundancy was awarded £2,230 for unauthorised wage deductions and failure to provide written particulars. The tribunal found the dismissal unfair.
1 min read · Last updated 19 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a gymnastics coach from 27 July 2019 to 19 January 2023.
- The respondent, Daniel May, was the sole director of several companies but personally employed the claimant after October 2022.
- The claimant was dismissed by email on 19 January 2023 with immediate effect, citing redundancy, without prior consultation.
- The claimant was not paid for 127 hours of work in December 2022 and January 2023, totalling £1,270.
- The respondent failed to provide written particulars of employment.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began working as a gymnastics coach for Daniel May at Leeds Rebound Gymnastics.
-
Company incorporated
Leeds Rebound Gymnastics Limited was incorporated, but dissolved on 12 January 2021.
-
Personal employment by Daniel May
After October 2022, the claimant was personally employed by Daniel May as the company was no longer active.
-
Conditional offer from FR Sports Coaching
Claimant received a conditional offer of employment from FR Sports Coaching, not preserving continuity.
-
Dismissal
Claimant received notice of termination by email, effective immediately, citing redundancy.
-
Respondent requested papers to company address
Daniel May requested that case papers be sent to the registered address of AAW Holdings Limited.
-
Invalid ET3 submitted
Daniel May submitted an invalid ET3 response on behalf of Leeds Rebound Gymnastics Limited.
-
Resubmitted ET3 and resignation
Daniel May resubmitted ET3 and resigned as director of AAW Holdings Limited.
-
Judgment
Employment Judge Lancaster found in favour of the claimant for unpaid wages and awarded compensation.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to determine whether the claimant was employed by Daniel May personally, whether there was an unauthorised deduction from wages, and whether the dismissal was unfair.
The outcome
The tribunal found in favour of the claimant on the claims for unauthorised deductions and unfair dismissal. It ordered the respondent to pay compensation totalling £2,230.
- £1,270 for unpaid wages (127 hours at £10 per hour)
- £400 for financial loss attributable to the unauthorised deduction
- £560 for failure to provide written particulars (4 weeks' pay at £140 per week)
Lessons & takeaways
- Even if you believe you are employed by a company, you may be personally employed by the director if the company is dissolved or inactive.
- Dismissing an employee by email with immediate effect without any consultation is likely to be unfair, especially if the employee has over two years' service.
- Employers must provide written particulars of employment within two months of the start date; failure to do so can result in a penalty of up to four weeks' pay.
- If you are not paid for hours worked, you can claim unauthorised deductions from wages, even if you agreed to a lower contracted hours but regularly worked more.
A coach left in the dark
A gymnastics coach who worked for a club in Leeds for over three years was dismissed by email with immediate effect, citing redundancy, without any prior warning or consultation. The tribunal found that the coach had been personally employed by Daniel May, the sole director of several companies, after the original employing company was dissolved. The coach had never been given a written statement of employment terms, and was not paid for 127 hours of work in December 2022 and January 2023.
What went wrong
The respondent, Daniel May, did not attend the hearing. The tribunal noted that the dismissal was procedurally flawed: there was no consultation, no notice period, and the redundancy reason was not properly established. The coach had been offered a conditional job with another company in December 2022, but that did not affect the liability for unpaid wages. The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to provide written particulars of employment, which attracted an additional award.
Why this matters
This case shows that employment status can be complex when companies are dissolved and directors continue to run the business personally. Employees should check who their legal employer is, especially if the company name changes or disappears. It also highlights that dismissing someone by email with immediate effect, without any process, is almost certainly unfair. The award of £2,230, while modest, reflects the unpaid hours and the penalty for failing to provide written terms. For employees in similar situations, keeping records of hours worked and payments received is crucial.
Similar cases
Redundancy without process: food sales assistant awarded £12,651 after unfair dismissal
A food sales assistant dismissed by a butchers that went into liquidation has won £12,651 for unfair dismissal, redundancy and wrongful dismissal after the tribunal found the employer failed to follow proper procedures.
Dismissed by email while on maternity leave: a conduct process that never happened
An account manager with 19 years' unblemished service was summarily dismissed by email while on maternity leave, with no investigation or disciplinary hearing. The tribunal awarded £37,310.
Redundancy claims dismissed after claimants failed to attend hearing
Three former employees had their claims for unfair dismissal, redundancy pay and unpaid wages dismissed after they failed to attend the tribunal hearing and provided no evidence.
Dismissed by redundancy without any warning: a window fabricator wins his case
A window fabricator with four years' service was dismissed by redundancy without any warning or consultation. The tribunal awarded £15,319 in unpaid wages, holiday pay, notice pay, redundancy pay and compensation.