The importance of the disciplinary appeal process: Milrine v DHL (2026)
EAT finds dismissal unfair in Milrine v DHL (2026). Key lessons for employers on appeal processes and reducing tribunal risk.
Read More
Kennedy v Hendy Group highlights the importance of supporting employees in redundancy and exploring alternative roles fairly.
14 July 2025
Case Study
A genuine redundancy situation with an otherwise fair process was held unfair by the Employment Appeal Tribunal, where the employee had not been supported in his search for alternative employment by the employer.
Mr Kennedy had worked for the Hendy Group as a training manager. The training role was placed at risk of redundancy, which was later held to be a genuine redundancy situation, and his selection was found to be fair. So far, so good.
However, his employer had failed to support him in finding a suitable alternative employment within the business. This rendered his dismissal unfair, and he was awarded substantial losses.
Although he was working as a training manager at the time of his dismissal, he had around 30 years’ experience in the car sales field. When it came to the search for alternative employment, his employer told him he could apply via the intranet. Unfortunately, they also removed his work laptop and his access to the intranet.
The HR department offered no help or assistance to him. The EAT was critical of this failure, as well as the fact that the HR department emailed him on a work account that he had been denied access to. Even more surprising, he was told that any applications for a sales role would be blocked, and the Judge commented that employing someone to train others on sales rather suggested he was good at it (if he had been deemed good enough to teach it to others). Therefore, the idea that he should not be considered for sales roles was “fundamentally unsound”.
Whilst the employer appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (“EAT”) they upheld the Tribunal’s decision and agreed that compensation should be awarded for full financial losses and that no reduction should be made. Now that the judgment has been upheld by the EAT it makes the decision binding on other Tribunals.
Case Study
This case is an excellent reminder of the need for employers to explore alternative employment options for the employee who is facing redundancy. This should not be overlooked.
Further, there is an obligation to do more than just refer to a list of advertised jobs. Instead, the employer (and in particular the HR department) should be offering proactive assistance.
Assumptions should not be made about what roles the employee may or may not want to do, and denying them access to the job vacancies and sending correspondence to an email address that you have disconnected is a definite no!
This case highlights the importance of supporting employees facing redundancy in their search for alternative roles within the organisation. Employers must actively assist, rather than simply directing employees to job listings.
Denying access to job applications or communication channels can lead to findings of unfair dismissal, even where redundancy is genuine and the selection process fair.
Proactive engagement by HR and management, along with clear, accessible communication, is crucial to reduce legal risk and help retain valuable employees where possible.
Contact Us
Want expert advice on handling redundancies fairly and reducing risk? Complete the form below, and a member of our employment team will be in touch.
Knowledge
EAT finds dismissal unfair in Milrine v DHL (2026). Key lessons for employers on appeal processes and reducing tribunal risk.
Read MoreTuesday
25
March
Join us for breakfast and networking, followed by our expert speaker presentation, a roundtable discussion, and a Q&A session.
Book your placeWednesday
26
March
Employment law update on family leave rights for 2026. Practical guidance, new entitlements and live Q&A for employers.
Book your placeET finds indirect sex discrimination where trans woman used female changing rooms, highlighting employer obligations and staff rights.
Read MoreET dismisses claims over trans women using female toilets, clarifying employer duties and best practice for workplace facilities.
Read MoreET rules on non-binary staff, workplace records, and harassment, clarifying protections under the Equality Act.
Read MoreEmployment Tribunal examines gender critical beliefs, trans rights, and single-sex spaces in landmark Peggie v Fife Health Board case.
Read MoreWednesday
11
March
Join us on 11 March 2026 for our Employment Law Seminar: key changes, tribunal cases, and expert insights for HR professionals.
Book your placeDownload our Employment Rights Act Resource Pack to navigate key 2025–2027 employment law changes with expert guidance and practical tools.
Read moreEmployee falls asleep at work and is unfairly dismissed; explore lessons for employers on investigations, mitigation, and proportionality.
Read MoreHow employers can handle whistleblowing effectively to reduce risk and prevent escalation, drawing lessons from the Argence-Lafon case.
Read MoreExplore lessons from the Ritchie V Goom Electrical Ltd case on managing conflicting workstyles and age diversity in modern offices.
Read MoreScroll to next section
Scroll back to the top
On Monday 29 September, Flint Bishop successfully completed the acquisition of the entire business of Lupton Fawcett LLP. You have been forwarded to the page most relevant to your visit.
Please feel free to explore our website and learn more about our legal services and professionals, including those who have recently joined us from Lupton Fawcett.