Literal Humans Ltd

Case Summary

The claimant was dismissed by the respondent, a digital marketing agency, without notice on 18 July 2024. The claimant brings claims for ordinary unfair dismissal, automatically unfair dismissal (protected disclosure), a redundancy payment, and breach of contract (unpaid notice pay). The tribunal must determine the reason for dismissal and whether it was a potentially fair reason. If the reason was redundancy, the tribunal must consider whether the respondent acted reasonably in treating it as sufficient to dismiss the claimant.

The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed in ordinary unfair dismissal proceedings because the dismissal procedure was fundamentally flawed (evidenced by the Polkey deduction for procedural failings), but rejected the automatic unfair dismissal claim on protected disclosure grounds and the redundancy claim on its merits.

Use these claim-type pages to compare this decision with other published tribunal cases, outcome patterns, and visible award data.

• •whether the reason for dismissal was redundancy or for a substantial reason capable of justifying the dismissal
• •whether the respondent acted reasonably in treating redundancy or the substantial reason as sufficient to dismiss the claimant

Case No:6015001/2024 1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Miss Olivia Messer Respondent: Literal Humans Limited HELD AT: Leeds Employment Tribunal (Hybrid in person hearing) ON: 3 and 4 February 2026 BEFORE: Employment Judge Buckley Tribunal Member Fawcett Tribunal Member Rhodes REPRESENTATION: Claimant: Respondent: In person In person (Mr. David) RESERVED JUDGMENT LIABILITY 1. The claim for automatic unfair dismissal is dismissed. 2. The claim for ordinary unfair dismissal succeeds. 3. The claim for wrongful dismissal succeeds. 4. The claim for a redundancy payment is dismissed. REMEDY 5. No reduction is made to the compensatory award for contributory fault under section 123(6) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Case No:6015001/2024 2 6. No reduction is made to the basic award for conduct under section 122(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. 7. A 10% deduction is made to the compensatory award under the principles set out in Polkey v AE Dayton Services Ltd [1987] UKHL 8. 8. The ACAS Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures does not apply. 9. The remainder of the tribunal’s remedy judgment will be given after a remedy hearing. REASONS Claims and Issues 1. The claimant brings the following claims: a. Ordinary unfair dismissal b. Automatically unfair dismissal (protected disclosure) c. Claim for a redundancy payment d. Claim for breach of contract (unpaid notice pay) 2. The tribunal set out at the beginning of the hearing that it would determine the issues of liability, conduct and contributory fault, compliance with any relevant ACAS code of practice and any deduction for the chance that the claimant would have been dismissed fairly in any event. The remainder of the issues on remedy will be determined at a separate remedy hearing. 3. The issues are as set out in the case s…