Tarmac’s 89-year-old boss wins unfair dismissal from his managing Director, who claimed he was being made redundant

  •  Andrew Robson claimed his boss who has dementia had made him redundant 
  • Eric Roberts boss said that no one had been made redundant by him during the tribunal
  • Judge concluded Mr Robson had resigned from his £50,000-a-year MD role 










The managing director of a tarmac business has brought a case against the owner for unfair dismissal. He claimed that he was made redundant and is now a boss at his company.

Andrew Robson claimed 89-year-old Eric Roberts – who set up the tarmac business in 1956 – had made him redundant after accusing him of ‘running the business into the ground’ during a downturn in trade. 

However a tribunal judge rejected this and concluded Mr Robson had resigned from his £50,000-a-year MD role.

Bodmin tribunal, Cornwall heard from Mr Roberts that he had been diagnosed as having dementia months prior to Mr Robson’s promotion to Eric Roberts Contractors Ltd managing director in October 2019.  

Andrew Robson claimed 89-year-old Eric Roberts had made him redundant but a tribunal judge rejected this. Mr Roberts set up Eric Roberts Contractors Ltd (company van pictured), based in St Columb, Cornwall, in 1956

 Andrew Robson claimed 89-year-old Eric Roberts had made him redundant but a tribunal judge rejected this. Eric Roberts Contractors Ltd, (company van pictured), was set up by Roberts in St Columb Cornwall in 1956.

Roberts stated that at January 2021’s meeting there had been a discussion about safety and health issues, and the possibility of filling extra potholes without additional cost. However, he wasn’t criticizing anyone’s work and those were suggestions and not orders.

Later, Mr Robson led Mr Roberts to a private room and said: “If you are unhappy with how I run the business, then I will go.”

Roberts stated that he was immediately able to tell Roberts, “If you don’t like the way I run the business, then I will go.” You owe me money. I’ll accept the van instead.

“He continued talking, and would not let me speak an edgeway word. I was stunned and did not know what was really going on.

Roberts related how the managing director then requested that the office manager come in to the room and take notes, before accusing the boss of making him redundant.

He added, “I don’t know how you make someone redundant.” In my 65-years of life, I’ve never made anybody redundant. Andrew was the MD and it wasn’t his job to go.  

Roberts claimed that Robson called him next day and asked him to sign the document. He did so without even reading it.

He discovered the letter was actually a redundancy note only afterward.

Roberts claimed that Mr Roberts did not send the email and was not able to do calculations on redundancy. I am an elderly man who cannot use computers and/or the Internet. 

A tribunal judge concluded Mr Robson had resigned from his £50,000-a-year MD role at Eric Roberts Contractors Ltd

A tribunal judge concluded Mr Robson had resigned from his £50,000-a-year MD role at Eric Roberts Contractors Ltd

“I sign paper and other paperwork for my team regularly and never had any questions as to the contents of what I was signing. Unfortunately, I nearly never understood what I signed. Like everyone, I trust the Claimant.

“Following Claimant’s final day, I discovered that he had made his final payments through our payroll clerk. He also received a redundancy payment. The Claimant had taken the company van to replace the bonus he believed he owed. The company van was worth in excess of £25,000 at the time.

I did not fire the Claimant. He controlled the entire meeting during which he made the announcement that he would not be continuing his role as MD. To this day, I don’t know how he reached the conclusion that I requested him to step down from the role of MD.     

Terry Falcao was Mr Roberts’ lawyer and suggested to Robson that they had taken Robson out for a private talk to ‘isolate’ him from other meeting staff – which he strongly denied.

Robson stated that Eric Roberts asked him what was the problem. Robson said that he didn’t like how I ran the business. He was running it into the ground.

Falcao said that Roberts’ dismissal was not possible because he had sixfolded the profits of the business. 

While the judge in employment described the situation as “a very uncommon set of facts”, he stated that he believed the evidence provided by Roberts (who built up the family company) was ‘credible, compelling.

Robson lost his unfair dismissal claim and is now facing a costs order.

Advertisement