Demanding a £500,000 bonus: dismissal without process was unfair
A senior manager who was summarily dismissed after her solicitor demanded a £500,000 bonus has won her unfair dismissal claim, but the tribunal said she would have been fairly dismissed after a proper process.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #bonus-dispute
- #family-business
- #no-dismissal-process
- #whistleblowing-claim-failed
- #polkey-reduction
- #holiday-pay
Key facts
- The claimant was employed by the 1st respondent from June 2014 until dismissal on 8 September 2020.
- The claimant and the 4th respondent were in a personal relationship from 2013 until April 2019.
- The claimant alleged she was promised a £500,000 bonus in January 2018, but the tribunal found no binding agreement.
- The claimant's solicitor sent a letter on 8 September 2020 demanding the bonus and alleging potential unlawful conduct.
- The respondents dismissed the claimant summarily without any investigation or hearing.
- The tribunal found the dismissal unfair due to lack of process, but held the claimant would have been fairly dismissed after a fair process.
Timeline
-
Claimant started working for 1st respondent
Initially self-employed, became employee on 1 June 2014.
-
Alleged bonus promise
During a dinner in Germany, the claimant says she was promised a £500,000 bonus payable in Summer 2019. The tribunal found no binding agreement.
-
Relationship ended
The claimant's personal relationship with the 4th respondent ended.
-
Bonus not paid
The alleged bonus was not paid in Summer 2019. The claimant did not raise it in writing until May 2020.
-
First written mention of bonus
Claimant texted the 4th respondent claiming the company owed her £500,000.
-
Dog taken from claimant
The 4th respondent and a family member took back a dog that had been in the claimant's possession for 5 years.
-
Further texts about bonus
Claimant sent texts reiterating the bonus claim; the 4th respondent did not challenge it.
-
Solicitor's letter and dismissal
Claimant's solicitor sent a pre-action letter demanding £500,000 and alleging potential unlawful conduct. The respondents dismissed the claimant summarily for gross misconduct.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's summary dismissal for gross misconduct was fair, and whether she was entitled to a £500,000 bonus and other payments.
The outcome
The tribunal declared the claimant was unfairly dismissed because the employer carried out no investigation or hearing before dismissing her. However, it also found that, had a fair process been followed, she would still have been dismissed. As a result, the tribunal applied a 100% Polkey reduction, meaning she received no compensation for the unfair dismissal.
Other claims:
- Bonus claim: Failed – no binding agreement for a £500,000 bonus.
- Holiday pay: Succeeded – the claimant was awarded unpaid holiday pay.
- Wrongful dismissal: Succeeded – the claimant was entitled to notice pay.
- Whistleblowing claim: Failed – the solicitor's letter did not amount to a protected disclosure.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers must carry out a reasonable investigation and give the employee a chance to respond before dismissing for misconduct, even if the misconduct seems obvious.
- A demand for a large bonus, even if disputed, does not necessarily justify summary dismissal without any process.
- If a tribunal finds that a fair process would have led to the same outcome, it can reduce compensation to zero using a Polkey reduction.
- Whistleblowing claims require a clear disclosure of information in the public interest; a solicitor's letter demanding money and alleging unlawful conduct may not qualify.
A dismissal without any process
This case shows what happens when an employer reacts to a perceived threat by dismissing an employee without any investigation or hearing. The claimant, a senior manager with six years' service, had her solicitor send a letter demanding a £500,000 bonus and alleging potential unlawful conduct. The employer, 221B Limited, responded by summarily dismissing her for gross misconduct the same day, without giving her a chance to explain.
The tribunal found that this lack of process made the dismissal unfair. Even if the employer believed the claimant had committed gross misconduct, they were still required to carry out a reasonable investigation and give her an opportunity to respond. Skipping those steps is a clear procedural failure.
What the employer could have done differently
The employer could have suspended the claimant pending an investigation, then held a disciplinary hearing where she could present her side. If they still considered her actions to be gross misconduct, they could have dismissed her after a fair process. The tribunal found that this is exactly what would have happened: had a proper process been followed, the claimant would have been fairly dismissed. As a result, the tribunal applied a 100% Polkey reduction, meaning she received no compensation for the unfair dismissal itself.
Why this matters for similar claims
This case is a reminder that procedural fairness is not optional. Even if an employer is convinced of an employee's guilt, they must still follow a fair process. However, it also shows that a finding of unfair dismissal does not always lead to a payout. If the tribunal is satisfied that a fair process would have produced the same outcome, compensation can be reduced to nothing.
The claimant did succeed in her claim for wrongful dismissal (notice pay) and holiday pay, but her main claim for a £500,000 bonus failed because the tribunal found no binding agreement. Her whistleblowing claim also failed because the solicitor's letter did not meet the legal test for a protected disclosure.
Similar cases
Café worker automatically unfairly dismissed for asserting right to written contract
A café worker with only six months' service was automatically unfairly dismissed after asking for a written contract. The tribunal awarded over £2,000 including injury to feelings for age discrimination.
Dismissed without a meeting or appeal: a conduct case with big reductions
A former employee of Fairview Grocers Limited was unfairly dismissed without any meeting or right of appeal, but his own conduct led to a 60% cut in compensation. He was awarded £3,752.89 in total.
Dismissed by father after family breakdown: WhatsApp message found to be unfair dismissal
A father who told his daughter 'I don't have a job for you, in fact I hope I never see u again' in a WhatsApp message was found to have unfairly dismissed her. The tribunal awarded £13,977.58.
Security guard with 28 months' service found to be employee, unfairly dismissed
A security guard who was removed from his assignment and not given any disciplinary process has been found to be an employee and unfairly dismissed. The tribunal also ordered the employer to pay outstanding holiday pay for the full 28 months of service.