Dismissed without a disciplinary hearing: procedural unfairness costs employer £9,500
A former employee with two years' service was unfairly dismissed after being suspended and then sacked without any disciplinary hearing. The Cambridge tribunal awarded £9,546.81 in compensation.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed from 7 March 2019 and dismissed on 9 September 2021.
- The dismissal was procedurally unfair because no disciplinary hearing was held.
- The claimant was over 41 and had two full years of service.
- The claimant received £10,976 in Universal Credit in the year after dismissal.
- The claimant obtained brief work in early 2022 earning £640.
- The claimant did not secure alternative permanent employment within 52 weeks.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began employment with the respondent.
-
TUPE transfer
A TUPE transfer took effect, continuing the claimant's employment.
-
Suspension
Claimant was suspended from work.
-
Dismissal
Claimant was dismissed without a disciplinary hearing.
-
Brief employment
Claimant received £640 from a short-lived job.
-
Liability judgment
Employment Judge Douse found the dismissal procedurally unfair.
-
Remedy hearing (final)
Remedy hearing concluded; judgment reserved.
-
Remedy judgment
Award of £997.50 basic award and £8,549.31 compensatory award, subject to recoupment.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide the appropriate remedy for an unfair dismissal where the employer had dismissed the employee without any disciplinary process, and where the employee had contributed to the dismissal through his own conduct.
The outcome
The tribunal awarded a total of £9,546.81, comprising a basic award of £997.50 and a compensatory award of £8,549.31.
Key reductions were applied:
- Polkey reduction (30%): reflecting the chance that a fair process would still have led to dismissal.
- Contributory conduct reduction (25%): because the employee's own actions contributed to the dismissal.
- Mitigation of loss: the employee received £10,976 in Universal Credit and earned £640 from brief work, which reduced the compensatory award.
- Recoupment: the prescribed element of £8,549.31 is subject to recoupment from benefits.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers must hold a proper disciplinary hearing before dismissing an employee, even if they believe the misconduct is clear.
- Employees with at least two years' service have the right to a fair procedure; skipping the hearing is almost certain to make a dismissal unfair.
- Compensation can be reduced if the employee's own conduct contributed to the dismissal, or if the employee failed to mitigate their loss by seeking work.
- The Polkey reduction allows tribunals to reduce compensation if a fair process would probably have led to the same outcome.
What this case shows
This case is a textbook example of procedural unfairness. The employee was suspended on 2 August 2021 and dismissed just over a month later on 9 September 2021, without ever being given a disciplinary hearing. The tribunal found that this fundamental failure made the dismissal unfair, regardless of the underlying conduct.
The employee had two years' service, which gave him the right not to be unfairly dismissed. The employer, Nathan Gittings, acted as a sole trader and represented himself at the hearing. The employee also represented himself, which is common in smaller claims.
What the employer could have done differently
The employer could have easily avoided this outcome by holding a simple disciplinary meeting. Even if the employer believed the misconduct was serious enough to justify dismissal, a fair process would have required giving the employee a chance to respond to the allegations. The tribunal applied a 30% Polkey reduction, meaning there was a chance that a fair process would still have led to dismissal, but the employer's failure to follow any procedure meant the dismissal was automatically unfair.
Why this matters for similar claims
For employees, this case reinforces that procedural fairness is not optional. Even if an employer thinks the case is open and shut, they must follow a proper process. For employers, the message is clear: skipping the disciplinary hearing is a high-risk strategy that will almost certainly result in a finding of unfair dismissal and a compensation award.
The compensation was also reduced by 25% for contributory conduct, reflecting the employee's own role in the events. This shows that employees cannot ignore their own behaviour when claiming compensation.
Similar cases
Apprentice carpenter dismissed for taking unauthorised holiday: no investigation or hearing
An apprentice carpenter was unfairly dismissed after taking a week's holiday despite his employer's refusal. The tribunal found the dismissal procedurally unfair and awarded £918.13, including unlawful deduction claims.
Analyst dismissed for comments during cultural awareness training: procedural flaws led to unfair dismissal
A Grade 5 analyst at the National Crime Agency was unfairly dismissed after making allegedly racist comments during a training event. The tribunal found the process was flawed by an initial promise of informal resolution and a 16-month delay, but reduced compensation due to her own conduct.
PCV driver dismissed after failing breath tests: flawed appeal but dismissal largely upheld
A PCV driver who failed three breath alcohol tests was unfairly dismissed due to a flawed appeal, but the tribunal found she would have been dismissed anyway and reduced compensation by 75% for contributory conduct.
Manager dismissed for password breach wins unfair dismissal claim
A manager with six years' service was unfairly dismissed after a flawed investigation into password sharing and order deletion. The tribunal awarded £5,552 but reduced compensation because he contributed to his own dismissal.