Axiom Ince: Dismissal claim was not defended
Artificial intelligence (AI) “has its limitations”, an employment tribunal judge has told a man who used it in a claim against collapsed law firm Axiom Ince.
Ben Chiu was awarded £16,262 in damages for unfair and wrongful dismissal, the latest in a series of tribunal claims [1] brought against the law firm, which is in administration and did not defend the claim.
Judge JM Wade in Leeds said Mr Chiu – having obtained consent for his claim to proceed – had presented a schedule of loss that he admitted was drafted with the help of AI.
The judge said: “I accepted the contents as to new role earnings and timing and pension and cost of car, supported by the oral evidence, but in other respects the losses sought were misconceived in light of the claims presented. AI has its limitations.”
Mr Chiu worked as an executive assistant at Axiom Ince from March 2017. He was paid £60,000, given a Tesla car – replacement of which would have cost £950 per month in lease and other costs – and an employer’s pension contribution of £250 per month.
Internet searches indicate that Mr Chiu was executive assistant to Axiom Ince boss Pragnesh Modhwadia, who is facing two counts [2] of fraud by abuse of position. There is no suggestion that Mr Chiu was involved in any alleged wrongdoing at the firm.
He was on three months’ notice but was summarily dismissed on 4 September 2023, a month before the Solicitors Regulation Authority shut the firm down.
Mr Chiu found new employment after two and a half months, but on a salary £584 a month lower, a lower pension and no car.
Judge Wade calculated the award on the basis of gross loss of salary and applying the mitigating sums.
“I make no unfair dismissal compensatory award beyond loss of statutory rights for two reasons: firstly, any such award would duplicate the damages award and result in a windfall; and secondly, applying Polkey it is clear that the claimant’s employment would have come to an end fairly that autumn in any event by reason of redundancy.
“This claim is one in a series arising from a law firm ceasing to trade and then entering administration.”
The Polkey principle – which mitigates loss when the employee would have been dismissed even if a fair procedure was followed – does not apply to contractual damages.
The judge said Mr Chiu was dismissed in breach of a contractual provision for three months’ notice, excluding him from the right to statutory notice pay, and he suffered loss and damage as a result.
The Legal Services Board’s report into how the Solicitors Regulation Authority handled Axiom Ince is due imminently.