Unfairly dismissed by Jaguar Land Rover but 75% Polkey cut applied
A former employee was unfairly dismissed for capability reasons, but the tribunal applied a 75% Polkey deduction for the chance he would have been dismissed anyway. His race discrimination claims were dismissed.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was dismissed by reason of capability.
- The tribunal found the dismissal was unfair under s94 ERA.
- A 75% Polkey deduction was applied for the chance the claimant would have been dismissed anyway.
- The claimant's race discrimination claims under the Equality Act 2010 were dismissed.
- The case was settled via ACAS before the remedy hearing.
- The claimant's application for reconsideration was refused.
Timeline
-
Hearing begins
The substantive hearing commenced at Birmingham Employment Tribunal by CVP.
-
Hearing ends
The hearing concluded after five days.
-
Judgment issued
The tribunal found unfair dismissal but applied a 75% Polkey deduction; race discrimination claims dismissed.
-
Judgment sent to parties
The written judgment was sent to the parties.
-
Claimant's reply on reconsideration
The claimant indicated a settlement had been reached via ACAS.
-
Claimant's correspondence
The claimant sent a letter to the tribunal asking for a decision on remedy matters.
-
Latest correspondence
The claimant reiterated his request for reconsideration.
-
Reconsideration refused
Employment Judge Cookson refused the application for reconsideration.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employee was unfairly dismissed by reason of capability, and whether his race discrimination claims under the Equality Act 2010 were well founded.
The outcome
The tribunal found that the employee was unfairly dismissed under section 94 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. However, it applied a 75% Polkey deduction, meaning the employee would likely have been dismissed anyway even with a fair process. The race discrimination claims were dismissed as not well founded.
The case was settled via ACAS before a remedy hearing, so no compensation was awarded by the tribunal. The employee's later application for reconsideration was refused.
Lessons & takeaways
- A finding of unfair dismissal does not guarantee full compensation if the tribunal decides you would likely have been dismissed anyway.
- Polkey deductions can be substantial, so it is important to present evidence showing the realistic chance of retaining your job.
- Settling via ACAS ends the tribunal's jurisdiction, so you cannot later ask for a remedy hearing or reconsideration.
- Race discrimination claims require direct evidence of a protected characteristic being a cause of the treatment; mere dissatisfaction with a process is not enough.
A partial victory with a sting in the tail
The former employee won his claim that Jaguar Land Rover unfairly dismissed him on capability grounds. But the tribunal decided that even with a fair process, there was a 75% chance he would have been dismissed anyway. That meant any compensation would be heavily reduced.
What the employer could have done differently
Jaguar Land Rover's dismissal process was found to be procedurally flawed. The tribunal noted that the employer could have taken more steps to explore alternatives or follow a fuller capability procedure. However, the underlying reason for dismissal – capability – was genuine, which is why the Polkey deduction was so high.
Why this matters for similar claims
This case is a reminder that winning an unfair dismissal claim is only half the battle. The tribunal will assess what would have happened in a fair world, and if it decides you would have been dismissed anyway, your compensation can be slashed. The employee's race discrimination claims failed because there was no evidence linking his race to the dismissal. The ACAS settlement also meant he could not challenge the Polkey deduction later.
Similar cases
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.
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.
Fleet operative dismissed for phone use wins race discrimination claim
A fleet operative who was dismissed for using his mobile phone while driving has won his race discrimination and unfair dismissal claims. The tribunal found the dismissal was tainted by race and reduced compensation by 50% for contributory fault.
Residential support worker dismissed for attending work with possible COVID-19 symptoms: dismissal fair
A residential support worker was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct after attending work while possibly having COVID-19 symptoms. The tribunal rejected her claims of unfair dismissal, race discrimination and victimisation.