Former employee unfairly dismissed but gets only basic award after 70% contributory conduct deduction
A Watford tribunal found Mitie Ltd unfairly dismissed a former employee but reduced his basic award by 70% for his own conduct and made no compensatory award due to a 100% Polkey reduction. He received £1,298.10.
1 min read · Last updated 19 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant's unfair dismissal claim succeeded.
- The claimant's race and disability discrimination claims were dismissed.
- The claimant's harassment and victimisation claims were dismissed.
- The claimant's unlawful deduction from wages claim was dismissed.
- A basic award of £4,327 was reduced by 70% for contributory conduct.
- No compensatory award was made due to a 100% Polkey reduction.
Timeline
-
Claim 1 presented
Mr A Amadi presented claim 3332877/2018 against Mitie Ltd.
-
Claim 2 presented
Mr A Amadi presented claim 3321573/2019 against Mitie Ltd.
-
EJ Kurrein's decision
Employment Judge Kurrein made decisions on deposit order and amendment refusal.
-
Case management by EJ Mason
Employment Judge Mason discussed issues at a preliminary hearing.
-
Case management by EJ Quill
Employment Judge Quill conducted a preliminary hearing and set orders.
-
Preliminary hearing before EJ Quill
EJ Quill heard the claimant's application to vary/revoke earlier decisions and gave judgment.
-
Written judgment sent
The judgment of 27 May 2022 was sent to parties in writing.
-
Reconsideration judgment
EJ Quill refused the claimant's application for reconsideration and other applications.
-
Final hearing begins
The final hearing took place over seven days before EJ Cowen and members.
-
Final judgment
Employment Judge Cowen gave oral judgment dismissing most claims but upholding unfair dismissal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the former employee was unfairly dismissed for conduct, and whether he had also suffered race discrimination, disability discrimination, harassment, victimisation, or unlawful deduction from wages.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld the unfair dismissal claim but dismissed all other claims (race and disability discrimination, harassment, victimisation, and unlawful deduction from wages).
The key reasons were:
- The dismissal was procedurally unfair, but the claimant's own conduct contributed 70% to the dismissal.
- A 100% Polkey reduction was applied, meaning even with a fair procedure the claimant would have been dismissed.
Compensation breakdown:
- Basic award: £4,327.00
- Reduced by 70% for contributory conduct: £3,028.90
- Polkey reduction (100% of compensatory award): £0.00
- Total awarded: £1,298.10
Lessons & takeaways
- Even if a dismissal is found unfair, a tribunal may reduce compensation significantly if the employee's own conduct contributed to the dismissal.
- A Polkey reduction can wipe out the compensatory award entirely if the employer can show the employee would have been dismissed anyway with a fair procedure.
- Bringing multiple discrimination claims that are not well-founded can lead to a deposit order and may not succeed, even if the unfair dismissal claim wins.
- Representing yourself in a complex multi-day tribunal hearing is challenging; professional representation may improve outcomes.
What this case shows in practice
This case illustrates how an employee can win an unfair dismissal claim but still receive very limited compensation. The former employee succeeded in proving that Mitie Ltd's dismissal procedure was unfair, but the tribunal found that his own conduct contributed significantly to the dismissal. The basic award of £4,327 was reduced by 70% to £1,298.10 because of his contributory fault.
More significantly, the tribunal applied a 100% Polkey reduction, meaning that even if a fair procedure had been followed, the employee would still have been dismissed. This wiped out any compensatory award entirely. The result: a total award of just over £1,200 for a successful unfair dismissal claim.
What the losing side could have done differently
For Mitie Ltd, the failure to follow a fair procedure was the key error that led to the finding of unfair dismissal. A more thorough process — including proper investigation, giving the employee a chance to respond, and considering alternatives — could have avoided this outcome. However, the strong contributory conduct finding and Polkey reduction show that the employer's case on the merits was compelling.
For the employee, pursuing multiple discrimination claims that were ultimately dismissed may have diverted resources and attention from the stronger unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal also noted a deposit order had been made against some claims, indicating they were considered weak from an early stage.
Why the result matters for similar claims
This case is a reminder that winning an unfair dismissal claim does not guarantee a large payout. Tribunals have wide discretion to reduce awards for contributory conduct and to apply Polkey reductions where dismissal was inevitable. Employees should be realistic about potential compensation, especially if their own behaviour played a part in the dismissal. Employers, meanwhile, should not assume that a strong substantive case will protect them from a finding of unfairness if the procedure is flawed.
Similar cases
Deputy principal dismissed for redundancy after consultation meeting lacked clear purpose
A deputy principal with 14 years' service was unfairly dismissed after the trust failed to tell her the purpose of a redundancy consultation meeting. The tribunal awarded no compensation, however, finding she would have been dismissed anyway.
Lorry driver with 18 days' service: unfair dismissal struck out but discrimination claims survive
A lorry driver who resigned after 18 days and later worked as an agency driver was unable to claim unfair dismissal due to short service, but his disability and race discrimination claims will proceed to a final hearing.
Dismissed for redundancy that wasn't genuine: a warning for employers
A former employee was unfairly dismissed after her employer failed to prove a genuine redundancy exercise. The tribunal awarded £1,921.85 in compensation.
Dismissed after attending manager's home with white spirit: unfair but no compensation
A tribunal found that Open GI Ltd unfairly dismissed a disabled employee after he attended his manager's home with white spirit, but awarded no compensation due to his conduct. The employee received £2,805 for injury to feelings on a related discrimination claim.