The claimant was employed by the respondent as a site manager for eight years prior until 10th April 2014. In or about May 2013, the claimant asked if he could take a period of unpaid leave from January 2014 until 4th April 2014 which was readily agreed.

Upon his return he received his p45 from the respondent which he subsequently questioned. The Managing Directors of the respondent made it clear that he was not going to resume his employment and that they had no work for him. The claimant believed his had been dismissed and there was no evidence from the respondent to suggest otherwise. The claimant secured similar employment with another employer shortly after. Subsequent correspondence from the respondent offered the claimant a return to employment and described the issuing of a p45 as 'a mistake'.

The tribunal held that the claimant had been dismissed by the respondent and whilst the latter attempted to explain the issuing of a p45 as 'a mistake', the tribunal was unimpressed as there was no explanation in writing about the relevant circumstances which led to the respondent to contemplate dismissing the claimant. Further, he was not invited to attend a meeting to discuss the matter. The tribunal also noted the fact that there was no right of appeal notified to the claimant and deemed the dismissal to be automatically unfair, pursuant to Article 130A(1) of the 1996 Order.

Practical lessons

The respondent's attempt to 'undo' the dismissal of the claimant by labelling the p45 as 'a mistake' did not convince the tribunal who were markedly unimpressed by the lack of any disciplinary or dismissal procedure.

If anything, this decision stresses the absolutely vital importance of keeping an employee informed of their status throughout a disciplinary/dismissal procedure. If the respondent had at least started by providing an explanation along with the p45 it may have had some basis for an argument, but this failure was indicative of their whole attitude to the matter.