Dismissal of secondee on return was not a redundancy

Case 7: The facts

After three years of working for the Greater Glasgow Health Board, Ms Lamont accepted a transfer to a new post as junior doctor monitoring and liaison officer.

It was a temporary fixed-term contract lasting two years, filling in for the post-holder who was on a two-year secondment.

Lamont was dismissed when the post-holder returned two years later. Lamont brought a successful tribunal claim for a contractual redundancy payment, but the health board appealed.

The ruling

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) reversed the decision, ruling that Lamont was not entitled to a redundancy payment because the reason for her dismissal was not redundancy. Instead it was the ending of the fixed-term contract upon the planned return of the original secondee.

It is possible to claim a redundancy payment where a fixed-term contract expires, confirmed the EAT, but only where the contract is not renewed because of a reduced need for employees (Pfaffinger v City of London Community College [1997] ICR 142).

In Pfaffinger, the contract was not renewed because the employer needed fewer part-time lecturers. In contrast, in Lamont’s case the contract was not renewed because the original post-holder returned to reclaim her post. There was no redundancy situation and Lamont had no right to a redundancy payment.

Greater Glasgow Health Board v Lamont UKEATS/0019/12/B1

www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2012/0019_12_2106.html