Search

How can we help?

Icon

Employer’s reasonable and genuine belief can be sufficient for SOSR dismissal

In Nayak v Royal Mail Group, the EAT upheld the tribunal’s decision that an employer’s genuine and reasonable belief that an employee was no longer permitted to work in the UK was sufficient to show that he had been dismissed for some other substantial reason (SOSR).

It is Royal Mail’s policy to conduct employee immigration checks every six months where visa outcomes are pending.  Mr Nayak worked under a number of visas throughout his employment at Royal Mail (RM) and, upon expiry of his visa in 2010, applied for a Tier 4 (General) student migrant visa.  Whilst this was originally refused, he successfully appealed and his application was passed to the Home Office for consideration and processing.

Mr Nayak’s situation meant that he was subject to RM’s immigration check policy.  However, when asked to provide proof of his right to work in the UK on three occasions between August 2012 and February 2013, he failed to cooperate with RM’s requests.  Further enquiries were made of him between December 2013 and May 2014 and he was told that the right to work could only last whilst his visa application remained pending.  Given that his application had been made more than four years previously, and in the absence of any evidence of his immigration status, RM could not simply assume that it remained pending.  Mr Nayak was advised that his failure to provide the requisite evidence may result in his dismissal and, when he did not do so, was dismissed.  His appeal was unsuccessful and he brought a claim for unfair dismissal.

 

The EAT upheld the tribunal’s decision that an employer’s genuine and reasonable belief that an employee was no longer permitted to work in the UK was sufficient to show that he had been dismissed for SOSR.

The claim was dismissed both at first instance (by the tribunal) and on appeal.  The EAT upheld the tribunal’s decision that an employer’s genuine and reasonable belief that an employee was no longer permitted to work in the UK was sufficient to show that he had been dismissed for SOSR.  There was adequate evidence that RM had attempted to establish Mr Nayak’s immigration status over a number of years and he had continually failed to cooperate in the process.

The case demonstrates that a dismissal for SOSR can be justified by the employer’s genuine and reasonable belief.  This is in contrast to a statutory restriction dismissal (which is another potentially fair ground for dismissal) where an employer’s actual knowledge is required.

Disclaimer

This information is for guidance purposes only and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. Please refer to the full General Notices on our website.

Author profile

Caroline Lendrum

Associate

View profile

+44 118 960 4669

About this article

Read, listen and watch our latest insights

Pub
  • 09 July 2026
  • Litigation and dispute resolution

The Arbitration Act 2025 – Factsheet

This factsheet outlines the major reforms and key developments introduced by the Arbitration Act 2025, including updates on summary disposal, jurisdictional challenges, emergency arbitrators, arbitrator disclosure duties, and governing law in arbitration proceedings.

art
  • 09 July 2026
  • Immigration

Right to Work Checks are changing from 1 October 2026: Is your business ready?

The Home Office’s new rules, effective 1 October 2026, will overhaul right to work checks and raise the risk of civil penalties for UK businesses.

art
  • 08 July 2026
  • Privacy and Data Protection

ICO prosecutes employee under the Data Protection Act for forwarding client data to his personal email address

The issue of employees taking confidential business information or personal data when moving to a new employer remains a significant concern for businesses.

Pub
  • 07 July 2026
  • Litigation and dispute resolution

Accelerating arbitration: Expedited procedures and key changes in the new ICC Rules – Episode 2

In episode 2, Jack Hobbs (Clarkslegal) and Christopher Howitt (Three Stone) explore how the latest expedited and highly expedited procedures under the ICC Arbitration Rules 2026 are transforming the landscape of dispute resolution.

art
  • 07 July 2026
  • Employment

6 month unfair dismissal rights: What employers need to know

Under the new Employment Rights Act 2025 the minimum period of service required to qualify to bring a statutory claim for unfair dismissal has been reduced from 2 full years to 6 months from 1 January 2027 onwards.  

art
  • 02 July 2026
  • Litigation and dispute resolution

Litigation and Artificial Intelligence: Where are we now?

In the recent case of Cork and another v Smith, the High Court publicly admonished a law firm and two of its solicitors after they had produced and submitted two AI-generated letters to the court containing misleading and false information in relation to a block transfer application made under Rule 12.37 of the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016.