Cleaner unfairly dismissed after employer went into liquidation
A cleaner was unfairly dismissed when her employer went into liquidation without following any redundancy procedure. The tribunal awarded £14,522 in compensation, reduced by 50% for the chance she would have been dismissed anyway.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The Claimant was employed by the First Respondent as a cleaner.
- The First Respondent went into creditors' voluntary liquidation.
- There was no TUPE transfer to the Second Respondent.
- The Claimant was dismissed by the First Respondent by reason of redundancy.
- The dismissal was unfair because no proper redundancy procedure was followed.
- There was a 50% chance that the Claimant would have been fairly dismissed if a proper procedure had been followed.
Timeline
-
Holiday year start
The Claimant's holiday year began on 17 April 2021.
-
Dismissal
The Claimant was dismissed by the First Respondent by reason of redundancy.
-
Liability hearing (evidence)
The Tribunal heard evidence on liability.
-
Submissions and deliberations
The Tribunal heard submissions and deliberated.
-
Judgment and remedy hearing
The Tribunal issued its liability judgment and held a remedy hearing.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether there was a TUPE transfer to a second company, and whether the employee was unfairly dismissed by the first company when it went into liquidation.
The outcome
The tribunal found that there was no TUPE transfer, so the second company was not liable. The first company had dismissed the employee by reason of redundancy but without following any proper procedure, making the dismissal unfair. The employee was also entitled to a statutory redundancy payment, notice pay, and holiday pay.
Compensation:
- Statutory redundancy payment: £1,021.29
- Notice pay: £547.40
- Holiday pay: £909.00
- Compensatory award for unfair dismissal: £12,044.60 (after 50% Polkey reduction)
- Total: £14,522.29
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers must follow a fair redundancy procedure even if the company is in financial difficulty.
- A Polkey reduction may apply if the tribunal finds that a fair procedure would have still led to dismissal.
- Employees should check if a TUPE transfer applies when their employer changes, as liability may shift.
- Statutory redundancy payments are separate from unfair dismissal compensation and can be claimed even if the employer is insolvent.
This case shows what can happen when an employer goes into liquidation without following a proper redundancy process. The former employee, a cleaner, was dismissed by Carisway Facilities Support Ltd as the company entered creditors' voluntary liquidation. No consultation, no selection criteria, no warning — the dismissal was a straightforward redundancy, but the procedure was entirely absent.
What the tribunal decided
The tribunal found the dismissal unfair because the employer failed to follow any of the basic steps expected in a redundancy situation. However, it also applied a 50% Polkey reduction, meaning there was a 50% chance that a fair procedure would have still resulted in dismissal. This reduced the compensatory award from just over £24,000 to £12,044.60.
What the employer could have done differently
Even in a liquidation scenario, employers are expected to carry out a meaningful consultation, consider alternative roles, and apply objective selection criteria. Carisway did none of these. The tribunal noted that the employee had not contributed to her dismissal in any way, so no contributory fault reduction was applied.
Why this matters
For employees facing redundancy when their employer is struggling, this case confirms that the right to a fair process does not disappear just because the company is in financial trouble. It also highlights the importance of the Polkey principle: even where a dismissal is unfair, compensation can be reduced if a fair procedure would have made no difference. For employees, this means gathering evidence of what a fair process would have looked like is crucial.
Similar cases
Deputy principal dismissed for redundancy after consultation meeting lacked clear purpose
A deputy principal with 14 years' service was unfairly dismissed after the trust failed to tell her the purpose of a redundancy consultation meeting. The tribunal awarded no compensation, however, finding she would have been dismissed anyway.
Accounts manager made redundant without being offered available part-time role
An accounts manager with 15 years' service was unfairly dismissed when her employer failed to offer her a part-time role that became available during her notice period. The tribunal awarded £250 for loss of statutory rights.
Cleaner's redundancy claim struck out after being presented too late
A cleaner who was made redundant after her employer lost two cleaning contracts had her unfair dismissal and race discrimination claims struck out because she presented them to the tribunal more than three months after her dismissal.
Dismissed for being 'too expensive' after TUPE transfer: unfair dismissal win
A director with 16 years' service was dismissed days after being told he was 'too expensive' and 'no longer needed'. The tribunal found the real reason was not misconduct but cost-cutting, and awarded £61,298.