De Bank Haycocks v ADP RPO UK Ltd

Subject Matter

EMPLOYMENT — Redundancy — Consultation — United States parent company seeking to make redundancies — UK manager given standard matrix of subjective criteria by parent company to mark for redundancy selection — Claimant lowest ranked — Claimant having meetings with employer but only told own scores after dismissal and never told comparative scores of colleagues — Whether consultation exercise fair — Whether failure to consult at formative stage of redundancy process rendering dismissal unfair — Employment Rights Act 1996 (c 18), s 98(4)

[2023] EAT 129; [2024] ICR 432; [2024] IRLR 92; [2023] WLR(D) 502, EAT

[2024] EWCA Civ 1291; [2025] ICR 265; [2025] 2 All ER 828; [2025] IRLR 123; [2024] WLR(D) 468, CA

EMPLOYMENT — Redundancy — Consultation — Company seeking to make redundancies in team of 16 — Subjective selection criteria produced — Claimant lowest ranked — Claimant told of risk of redundancy and notified of selection criteria but not told scores — Claimant appealing against dismissal and told scores but appeal unsuccessful — Claim for unfair dismissal alleging unfair procedure — Appeal tribunal finding dismissal unfair in absence of consultation at formative stage — Type and timing of consultation required for fair dismissal in case of smaller-scale redundancies in non-unionised workplaces — Employment Rights Act 1996 (c 18), s 98(4)

[2024] EWCA Civ 1291; [2025] ICR 265; [2025] 2 All ER 828; [2025] IRLR 123; [2024] WLR(D) 468, CA

Appellate History

Commentary

Blackstone chambers
ADP RPO UK Ltd v Haycocks Case comment