← Back to case studies
Case law
Hendy Group Ltd v Kennedy

A trainer with three decades of experience in motor trade sales, including a strong track record running a car brand’s distributorship, was fairly selected for redundancy when his training team’s work genuinely dried up.

The ruling

EAT upheld no Polkey reduction: signposting adverts did not satisfy the duty to help find alternative work.”

Your employer's duty during redundancy is to actively help you find suitable alternative work, not just point you to the same adverts an outside candidate would see.

  • Keep a record of what roles existed during your notice period and what active help, if any, you received.
  • Passive signposting to public job listings doesn't satisfy your employer's legal duty to consider alternative employment.
  • If your employer actively failed to help despite suitable roles being available, that can affect both the fairness finding and any reduction to your compensation.
Read the full case

The situation

A trainer with three decades of experience in motor trade sales, including a strong track record running a car brand's distributorship, was fairly selected for redundancy when his training team's work genuinely dried up. He didn't dispute that the redundancy situation was real or that he'd been fairly selected.

What he disputed was what happened next. During his notice period, several sales roles were available across the wider group. Rather than actively helping him apply for or move into one of them, HR simply pointed him to the same public job listings on the company website that any outside candidate could see.

What the tribunal found

The tribunal, and then the EAT on appeal, held that treating a long-serving, well-qualified employee no differently from an external applicant fell short of what fairness requires. An employer's duty to consider alternative employment during redundancy isn't satisfied by passively signposting adverts. It requires genuinely helping the employee explore and be considered for roles that might suit them.

Because the employer had, in effect, actively failed to help rather than simply done nothing, the tribunal declined to reduce his compensation for any chance he'd have been dismissed anyway (a "Polkey" reduction). Given his experience and track record, he would more likely than not have secured one of the available roles if the employer had properly engaged with the process.

For the full picture of what your employer has to get right during a redundancy process, see our guide on being made redundant.

Full citation

Hendy Group Ltd v Kennedy. [2024] EAT 106. Employment Appeal Tribunal. 2024.

Last reviewed 11 July 2026