Former employee wins £86k for unfair dismissal by Bark.com
A former employee of Bark.com Global Limited has won £86,088 in an unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal found the company's decision to dismiss was unfair.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant's claim for unfair dismissal succeeded.
- The respondent was ordered to pay £86,088 total.
- The basic award was £1,088.
- The capped compensatory award was £85,000.
Timeline
-
Hearing day 1
Substantive hearing commenced at London Central Employment Tribunal by CVP.
-
Judgment given
Employment Judge Keogh issued judgment in favour of the claimant, awarding £86,088.
-
Reconsideration application
Claimant applied for reconsideration of the judgment.
-
Reconsideration refused
Employment Judge Keogh refused the reconsideration application.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed and, if so, what compensation should be awarded.
The outcome
The tribunal ruled in favour of the former employee, finding that Bark.com Global Limited had unfairly dismissed them.
Compensation awarded:
- Basic award: £1,088
- Compensatory award: £85,000 (capped)
- Total: £86,088
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers should ensure they follow a fair procedure before dismissing an employee, including giving them a chance to respond to concerns.
- The cap on the compensatory award for unfair dismissal is the lower of £93,878 or 52 weeks' pay, so high earners may be limited.
- Representing yourself at tribunal is possible but can be challenging; legal advice may improve outcomes.
What this case shows
This case demonstrates that even when an employer believes they have grounds for dismissal, a flawed process can lead to a finding of unfair dismissal. The former employee, who represented themselves at the hearing, successfully argued that Bark.com Global Limited had not acted reasonably in dismissing them.
The tribunal awarded £86,088, comprising a basic award of £1,088 and a capped compensatory award of £85,000. The cap on the compensatory award limited the total, but the sum still reflects the significant impact of the dismissal.
What the employer could have done differently
Bark.com could have avoided this outcome by following a fair procedure. This might have included giving the employee a clear warning, allowing them to respond, and considering alternatives to dismissal. The tribunal's decision suggests the company failed to act within the 'range of reasonable responses' expected of a reasonable employer.
Why this matters
For employees considering an unfair dismissal claim, this case shows that even without legal representation, it is possible to succeed if the facts support a finding of unfairness. For employers, it reinforces the importance of proper process and documentation when making dismissal decisions.
Similar cases
Whistleblowing claim: repeated amendment applications not unreasonable enough for costs
A former chartered accountant who made multiple applications to amend her whistleblowing and sex discrimination claims avoided a costs order, even though most amendments were refused. The tribunal said her conduct was not unreasonable or vexatious.
Redundancy claim struck out for non-disclosure: costs of £6,853 awarded
A senior manager's unfair dismissal claim was struck out after he failed to disclose documents about his new job. The tribunal ordered him to pay £6,853 in costs for unreasonable conduct.
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.
Claim struck out after failure to comply with tribunal orders due to ill-health
A former employee's unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims against Marks and Spencer were struck out after she failed to comply with tribunal orders and did not actively pursue her claim.