In the case 3389/MF, the applicant argued that his redundancy from Airmalta plc was not genuine and consequently, that he should be compensated for unfair dismissal. On the other hand, Airmalta claimed that the marketing business had changed throughout the years and through a restructuring process, it had been decided that the role of marketing manager was no longer needed.
In its summary of the case, the Tribunal noted that marketing work had been outsourced to an ex-employee and, that the work carried out was similar in nature to the work which the applicant used to carry out. The Tribunal commented that from the evidence and facts of the case, the applicant could have continued to carry out his duties, especially considering that a company like Airmalta had a need for a marketing person. Even though the way the business operated might have changed, this did not remove the necessity for the applicant’s role. The Tribunal also noted that the applicant had not been given training to be able to do the new duties which the employer was arguing that the marketing department needed.
Based on the above considerations, the applicant was awarded €20,000 in compensation for his unfair dismissal.
The applicant was represented by Dr Christine Calleja.
Disclaimer: This document does not purport to give legal, financial or tax advice. Should you require further information or legal assistance, please do not hesitate to contact Dr Christine Calleja