Where one of these reasons applies and automatic unfair dismissal is established, procedural unfairness (how disciplinaries were conducted etc.) are not relevant. Furthermore, in normal unfair dismissal cases, the Tribunal needs to consider if the motive was fair, and then go on to consider whether, in all the circumstances, the action was fair. These considerations will not apply in automatic unfair dismissal cases.
Making a claim of automatic unfair dismissal can be a good approach for an individual to take, not just because the two-year rule does not apply, but also because it can be a simpler claim to prove to an employment tribunal than a claim for ordinary unfair dismissal.
In normal unfair dismissal claim, the true reasoning for the action will be considered and whether it was fair, that is was it one of the five fair reasons laid down in the legislation (conduct, capability, redundancy, illegality or some other substantial reason) and was this really why the employer dismissed in this case?
Even where an employer can show it had potentially fair reasoning for the dismissal from work, a tribunal will then go on to consider if dismissing the employee was a fair action or not. This involves an assessment of whether the employer acted reasonably, including whether or not it followed a fair procedure when carrying out the dismissal.
Be in no doubt that this is a complex approach to deciding ordinary cases, and an employee may find themselves having to produce a lot of evidence and presenting a lot of different arguments to prove their case.
In automatic unfair dismissal, all an individual needs to prove is that the cause for their dismissal from work was one of the automatically unfair reasons.
Once the employee has satisfied a tribunal that this was the case, the dismissal will automatically be treated as unfair. No further consideration will go on to determine whether the employer acted reasonably in dismissing or the procedural fairness of the action, as this will no longer be relevant.