The Verification Lab · For lawyers · Free
The redundant role
The situation
You advise Mr Amadi, who was dismissed by Corrin Logistics. His employer says his job was made redundant. He asks whether he can claim unfair dismissal. You asked an AI assistant for a first memo and have the file open beside it.
What the AI was asked
Advise whether Mr Amadi can claim unfair dismissal against Corrin Logistics, and by when.
Every court, statute and person in this exercise is fictional (the Republic of Eastmark). Use only the source pack below, as you would use the real documents: nothing outside it counts.
The AI’s memo
For each sentence, decide: is it supported by the source pack, or is there a problem? Choose the kind of problem if you can.
1.Mr Amadi worked for Corrin Logistics from 3 February 2022 and was dismissed by a letter of 20 August 2023 stating that his role was redundant.
2.Under section 3, as amended in 2022, an employee with at least twelve months’ continuous service may claim unfair dismissal, so Mr Amadi qualifies.
3.Mr Amadi needs two years’ continuous service under section 3, so he cannot bring a claim.
4.A dismissal is fair only if it was for a permitted reason, such as redundancy, and the employer acted reasonably, including by genuinely consulting the employee before the decision.
5.Corrin did not replace Mr Amadi: the file shows no new hire into the role.
6.Ostrander held that hiring a replacement for the same duties proves that a redundancy was a sham.
7.In Ostrander the Court said that consultation is ‘a formality that may be skipped where the outcome is obvious’.
8.See also Penhallow v Corrin Logistics [2021] ESC 8, where the same employer was found to have dismissed unfairly.
9.No consultation meeting took place before the dismissal letter of 20 August 2023.
10.Mr Amadi is a trade union member and was entitled to union representation at the consultation.
11.Because Corrin’s letter used the word ‘redundant’, the dismissal was for a permitted reason and is therefore fair.
12.A claim must be presented within three months, less one day, of 20 August 2023, so by 19 November 2023.
13.The tribunal has no power to extend that deadline in any circumstances.
14.On the file, Mr Amadi appears to qualify, and the lack of any consultation, with the later advertisement for the same duties, makes the dismissal likely to be found unfair; whether the role was truly redundant is a matter for the evidence.
Professional skills training with fictional material. It is not legal advice and is not accredited by any court, regulator or professional body.