Managing Director's redundancy and disability claims dismissed by tribunal
A tribunal has dismissed claims of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination brought by a managing director with 8 years' service who was made redundant during the COVID-19 pandemic. No compensation was awarded.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #redundancy
- #managing-director
- #disability-discrimination
- #covid-19-furlough
- #salary-reduction
- #pool-of-one
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as Managing Director from September 2013 until June 2021.
- The claimant was diagnosed with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia in August 2014 and was accepted as disabled.
- The respondent was in a poor financial position and undertook a reorganisation for efficiency and economy.
- The claimant was placed on furlough from March 2020 and his role was later made redundant.
- The claimant agreed to a temporary salary reduction from £6,666 to £3,125 per month in April 2020.
- The respondent dismissed the claimant by reason of redundancy on 31 March 2021.
Timeline
-
Employment commenced
Claimant started work as Operations Director for Summit Chairs Limited.
-
Diagnosed with CLL
Claimant was diagnosed with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia, a disability accepted by the respondent.
-
Promoted to Managing Director
Claimant was promoted to Managing Director, tasked with handling director interactions, finance, marketing, and HR.
-
Advised to isolate due to COVID-19
Claimant's oncology team advised him to isolate due to being clinically extremely vulnerable.
-
Proposed salary reduction
Claimant suggested reducing his and Mr Simpson's salaries to £3,125 gross per month, including furlough payments.
-
Furloughed and role changes
Claimant was confirmed furloughed backdated to 18 March. Robert Butters became more involved, and Debbie Hayden was acting MD.
-
Informed role at risk
Mr Simpson emailed the claimant saying the business could no longer afford to keep him employed.
-
Redundancy consultation started
Robert Butters informed the claimant his role was at risk of redundancy and invited him to a consultation meeting.
-
Grievance letter sent
Claimant sent a five-page letter alleging his redundancy was linked to his disability and absence.
-
Dismissed by reason of redundancy
Claimant was dismissed and placed on garden leave until 30 June 2021.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the managing director was unfairly dismissed, discriminated against due to his disability (Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia), subjected to victimisation, or suffered breach of contract and unlawful deduction of wages.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims brought by the managing director against Summit Chairs Limited.
Key reasons:
- The redundancy was genuine due to the company's poor financial position and reorganisation.
- The selection process was fair, even though the claimant was the only person in the pool (pool of one).
- The claimant's disability did not influence the decision to dismiss; the respondent had made reasonable adjustments and the dismissal was not because of something arising from disability.
- The claimant's grievance was not a protected act for victimisation purposes.
- No unlawful deductions or breach of contract occurred.
No compensation was awarded as the claims were dismissed.
Lessons & takeaways
- A genuine redundancy situation can justify dismissal even if you are the only person in the role, provided the employer follows a fair process.
- Disability discrimination claims require evidence that the disability or something arising from it was a material cause of the dismissal – not just that you were disabled and dismissed.
- Agreeing to a temporary salary reduction does not prevent a later redundancy if the business's financial situation does not improve.
- Furlough does not protect you from redundancy; it is a temporary measure and your role can still be at risk.
This case shows that even long-serving employees in senior roles can be fairly dismissed for redundancy when a business faces genuine financial difficulties. The managing director, who had eight years' service and was accepted as disabled due to leukaemia, was furloughed during the pandemic and later made redundant when the company restructured.
What the tribunal considered
The tribunal examined whether the redundancy was genuine and whether the selection process was fair. Despite the claimant being the only person in the redundancy pool, the tribunal accepted that his role had ceased to exist due to the reorganisation. The employer had consulted with him, considered alternatives, and followed a reasonable process. The tribunal also found no evidence that the claimant's disability played any part in the decision – the company had made adjustments and the dismissal was purely for economic reasons.
What the employer did right
Summit Chairs Limited demonstrated that it had a clear business case for redundancy, communicated openly with the claimant, and gave him opportunities to comment. The tribunal noted that the claimant had agreed to a temporary salary reduction and was aware of the company's struggles. The employer also handled the claimant's health issues appropriately, including furloughing him when he was advised to shield.
Why the result matters
For employees, this case is a reminder that redundancy is a fair reason for dismissal even when the employee is disabled or has long service, as long as the employer acts reasonably. The tribunal will not second-guess business decisions if they are genuine and the process is fair. For employers, it reinforces the importance of documenting the business rationale, consulting properly, and avoiding any link between the dismissal and the employee's disability.
Similar cases
31-year employee made redundant: tribunal upholds fairness despite missed consultations
A tribunal has ruled that Wolseley UK Limited fairly dismissed a long-serving employee by reason of redundancy, rejecting claims of age discrimination, harassment, and victimisation.
20-year manager dismissed for capability after employer refused to adjust role for disability
A Global Governance Risk and Compliance Manager with 20 years' service was unfairly dismissed and discriminated against after GlaxoSmithKline failed to make reasonable adjustments for her hand disability. The tribunal awarded £24,785 for injury to feelings.
University academic unfairly dismissed after flawed redundancy consultation over retained post
A University of Leicester academic was unfairly dismissed when the university failed to properly consult on redundancy selection after changing its proposal to retain a permanent post. The tribunal awarded £72,487.50 in compensation.
Clinical Support Worker awarded statutory redundancy payment after 19 years' service
A tribunal awarded a statutory redundancy payment of £2,077.16 to a Clinical Support Worker with 19 years' service, finding that his refusal of an alternative role was not unreasonable.