Unfair dismissal found but compensation reduced to nil due to employee's conduct
A former employee won their unfair dismissal claim against Nottinghamshire Golf and Country Club Ltd, but the tribunal reduced all awards to nil because of their own conduct and the inevitability of dismissal.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed by the respondent as a former employee.
- The respondent dismissed the claimant.
- The tribunal found the dismissal was unfair.
- The claimant's conduct before notice was such that it was just and equitable to reduce the basic award by 100%.
- The claimant caused or contributed to his dismissal entirely, reducing the compensatory award by 100%.
- The claimant would have been inevitably dismissed had the respondent acted fairly, reducing the compensatory award by 100%.
Timeline
-
Unless Order issued
The Tribunal issued an Unless Order requiring the respondent to comply with case management directions.
-
Unless Order sent to parties
The Unless Order was sent to the parties.
-
Preliminary hearing
Employment Judge Hutchinson held a preliminary hearing and dismissed the respondent's response for failure to comply with the Unless Order.
-
Order dismissing response
Employment Judge Hutchinson issued a written order dismissing the respondent's response.
-
Relief from sanction hearing
Employment Judge Millns granted the respondent's application for relief from sanction, setting aside the order of 11 March 2022.
-
Final hearing (day 1)
The final hearing commenced before Employment Judge Smith.
-
Final hearing (day 5)
The final hearing continued.
-
Final hearing resumed (day 6)
The final hearing resumed after a break.
-
Final hearing (day 7)
The final hearing concluded.
-
Judgment on unfair dismissal
Employment Judge Smith issued a judgment finding the claimant's unfair dismissal claim well-founded but reducing all awards to nil due to contributory conduct and Polkey deduction.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employee was unfairly dismissed and, if so, what compensation should be awarded, considering the employee's own conduct and whether they would have been dismissed even with a fair process.
The outcome
The tribunal found that the employee was unfairly dismissed, but the award was reduced to nil.
- The basic award was reduced by 100% due to the employee's conduct before notice.
- The compensatory award was reduced by 100% because the employee caused or contributed to their own dismissal.
- A further 100% Polkey reduction was applied because the employee would have been inevitably dismissed even with a fair process.
- No increase was made for failure to follow the ACAS Code of Practice.
Lessons & takeaways
- Even if you win an unfair dismissal claim, your compensation can be wiped out if your own conduct contributed to the dismissal.
- Tribunals can apply a Polkey reduction if they believe you would have been dismissed anyway, even with a fair process.
- The ACAS Code of Practice is important, but failing to follow it does not automatically increase your award if the employer's actions were not unreasonable.
- Your behaviour before dismissal can be used to reduce both basic and compensatory awards if the tribunal considers it just and equitable.
A hollow victory
This case shows that winning an unfair dismissal claim does not always mean receiving compensation. The former employee succeeded in proving their dismissal was unfair, but the tribunal reduced every potential award to nil. The result is a stark reminder that an employee's own conduct can completely negate any financial remedy.
What went wrong for the employee
The tribunal found that the employee's conduct before being given notice was so serious that it was just and equitable to reduce the basic award by 100%. Furthermore, the employee was found to have caused or contributed entirely to their own dismissal, leading to a 100% reduction of the compensatory award. Finally, the tribunal concluded that even if the employer had acted fairly, the employee would have been inevitably dismissed, so a 100% Polkey reduction was applied.
Why the result matters
This case highlights the importance of an employee's own behaviour in unfair dismissal claims. Even when an employer's process is flawed, the tribunal can still deny compensation if the employee's actions were the real reason for dismissal. It also demonstrates that Polkey reductions can be applied at 100% where dismissal was inevitable. For employees considering a claim, this case is a cautionary tale: winning on liability does not guarantee a payout.
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.
Dismissed for being 'too expensive' after TUPE transfer: unfair dismissal win
A director with 16 years' service was dismissed days after being told he was 'too expensive' and 'no longer needed'. The tribunal found the real reason was not misconduct but cost-cutting, and awarded £61,298.
Unfair dismissal for conduct: ACAS code uplift and Polkey reduction applied
A former employee was unfairly dismissed for gross misconduct. The tribunal applied a 20% ACAS code uplift but also reduced compensation by 20% for contributory conduct and 20% for the chance she would have been dismissed anyway.
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.