Apprentice dismissed after asserting right to tax rebate: automatically unfair
A digital marketing apprentice who was dismissed days after writing to her employer about an unpaid tax rebate has won her claim for automatically unfair dismissal. The Manchester tribunal awarded £3,963.97 in compensation.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant started work as an apprentice on 8 March 2021.
- The claimant asserted a statutory right by letter on 17 January 2022 regarding an unpaid tax rebate.
- The respondent knew the apprenticeship was ending from 4/5 January 2022.
- The claimant was dismissed on 26 January 2022.
- The tribunal found the principal reason for dismissal was the claimant's assertion of a statutory right.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant started as an apprentice in level 2 animal welfare.
-
Second apprenticeship started
Claimant began a level 3 digital marketing apprenticeship.
-
Tax rebate due
Claimant should have received a tax rebate of £731.40 but it was not paid.
-
College meeting
Runshaw College noted the claimant was not receiving proper training.
-
Apprenticeship ending discussed
Claimant and respondent discussed the apprenticeship ending; claimant offered a 'normal' job.
-
Emails about apprenticeship
Claimant and respondent exchanged emails confirming the apprenticeship was ending.
-
Apprenticeship withdrawn
Runshaw College withdrew the claimant from the apprenticeship.
-
Claimant's letter asserting statutory right
Claimant wrote to respondent alleging unauthorised deduction of wages.
-
Respondent sought HR advice
Respondent contacted HR consultant and invited claimant to a meeting.
-
Dismissal meeting
Meeting held; claimant told employment was ending.
-
Dismissal confirmed
Claimant received dismissal letter terminating employment immediately.
-
Final payment
Claimant received net pay plus the overdue tax rebate.
-
New job started
Claimant began work as a wedding planner.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the main reason the apprentice was dismissed was because she had complained about an unauthorised deduction from wages (the unpaid tax rebate). If so, the dismissal would be automatically unfair regardless of her length of service.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld the claim of automatically unfair dismissal.
- The respondent accepted that the apprentice had asserted a statutory right by letter on 17 January 2022, alleging an unauthorised deduction (the tax rebate).
- The tribunal found that the principal reason for dismissal was that assertion, not any other factor.
- Compensation: £3,963.97 (compensatory award). No basic award as the claimant had less than two years' service.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employees with less than two years' service can still claim unfair dismissal if the reason is automatically unfair, such as asserting a statutory right.
- Employers should be careful not to dismiss an employee shortly after they have raised a complaint about wages or other statutory rights, as timing can be key evidence.
- Asserting a statutory right does not need to be in formal language; a clear letter alleging an unauthorised deduction is enough to trigger protection.
- Even if an employer has other reasons for dismissal, if the protected act is the principal reason, the dismissal will be automatically unfair.
A short service, a strong claim
This case shows that even employees with less than two years' service can bring an unfair dismissal claim if the reason for their dismissal is automatically unfair. The apprentice, who had started work in March 2021, was dismissed on 26 January 2022 – just nine days after she wrote to her employer about an unpaid tax rebate of £731.40. The tribunal found that this timing was no coincidence: the principal reason for her dismissal was her assertion of a statutory right.
What the employer could have done differently
The employer, A & T Trained Dogs Limited, knew the apprenticeship was ending and had discussed a 'normal' job with the claimant in early January. However, the dismissal letter came only after the claimant raised the tax rebate issue. The tribunal noted that the respondent sought HR advice and held a meeting, but the decision to dismiss was still tainted by the protected act. If the employer had separated the apprenticeship ending from the wage complaint, or had dealt with the rebate promptly, the outcome might have been different.
Why this matters
Automatically unfair dismissal claims do not require two years' service. Employees who are dismissed for asserting a statutory right – such as the right not to have unauthorised deductions from wages – can bring a claim from day one. This case is a reminder that employers must not let a protected act influence a dismissal decision, even if other factors are in play. The compensatory award of £3,963.97 reflected the claimant's loss of earnings until she found a new job as a wedding planner in June 2022.
Similar cases
Apprentice dismissed after raising National Minimum Wage concern: claim fails
A trainee project manager who was dismissed after complaining about underpayment of the National Minimum Wage lost his claim for automatic unfair dismissal. The tribunal found the real reason was performance and conduct issues.
Childcare worker dismissed after asking for minimum wage and rest breaks wins automatically unfair dismissal case
A nursery assistant with just 3 months' service was automatically unfairly dismissed after she raised concerns about being paid below the national minimum wage and not receiving rest breaks. The tribunal awarded £5,433.98.
Construction worker awarded £13,717 after employer deducted for missing boilers and paid £5 per hour
A construction worker was paid just £5 per hour and had £1,700 deducted for two allegedly missing boilers. The tribunal ordered Knights Bridge Contractors Limited to pay £13,717.47 in total.
HR Business Partner dismissed after one month for whistleblowing: £74,540 awarded
An HR Business Partner who raised concerns about a flawed redundancy process was dismissed after just one month. The tribunal awarded £74,540 after striking out the employer's response.