Care worker wins unfair dismissal claim but gets nothing after conduct findings
A former care worker succeeded in her unfair dismissal claim against Mihomecare Limited, but the tribunal reduced her compensation to zero because of her own conduct and the likelihood she would have been dismissed anyway.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed by the respondent as a care worker.
- The claimant was dismissed by the respondent.
- The claimant brought claims for unfair dismissal, race discrimination, pregnancy discrimination, victimisation, unlawful deduction of wages, and breach of contract.
- The tribunal found the unfair dismissal claim well-founded but dismissed all other claims.
- The tribunal found that the claimant's conduct contributed to her dismissal and that she would have been dismissed in any event had a fair procedure been followed.
- The basic and compensatory awards were reduced by 100% due to contributory conduct and the Polkey principle.
Timeline
-
Claim presented
The claimant presented her claim to the Employment Tribunal.
-
Liability hearing begins
The liability hearing commenced at Watford Employment Tribunal.
-
Liability hearing ends
The liability hearing concluded.
-
Liability judgment issued
The tribunal issued its judgment on liability, finding unfair dismissal but dismissing all other claims.
-
Remedy hearing begins
The remedy hearing commenced.
-
Remedy hearing ends
The remedy hearing concluded.
-
Remedy judgment issued
The tribunal issued its remedy judgment, reducing awards by 100% due to contributory conduct and Polkey.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed, and whether she was subjected to race discrimination, pregnancy discrimination, victimisation, unlawful deduction of wages, or breach of contract.
The outcome
The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed, but dismissed all other claims including race discrimination, pregnancy discrimination, victimisation, unlawful deduction of wages, and breach of contract.
Key reasons for the unfair dismissal finding were not detailed in the structured facts, but the tribunal concluded that the claimant's conduct contributed to her dismissal and that she would have been dismissed even if a fair procedure had been followed.
Compensation breakdown:
- Basic award: reduced by 100% for contributory conduct
- Compensatory award: reduced by 100% for contributory conduct and 100% under the Polkey principle (overall 100% reduction)
- Total compensation: £0
Lessons & takeaways
- Winning an unfair dismissal claim does not guarantee compensation if the tribunal finds you contributed to your dismissal.
- The Polkey principle allows tribunals to reduce compensation if the employer would have dismissed you fairly anyway.
- Bringing multiple discrimination claims that fail can weaken your overall case and may affect credibility.
- Having a lay representative rather than a solicitor may be a disadvantage in complex cases with multiple claims.
- Keep detailed records of all communications and decisions to support your claims.
A hollow victory for the former care worker
This case is a stark reminder that winning an unfair dismissal claim does not always mean receiving compensation. The former employee of Mihomecare Limited succeeded in proving she was unfairly dismissed, but the tribunal decided that her own conduct contributed to the dismissal and that she would have been let go anyway, even if a fair process had been followed. As a result, her compensation was reduced to zero.
The claimant brought a wide range of claims, including race discrimination, pregnancy discrimination, victimisation, and unlawful deduction of wages, all of which were dismissed. The tribunal found no evidence to support these allegations, leaving the unfair dismissal finding as the only success.
What the employer could have done differently
Mihomecare Limited could have avoided the unfair dismissal finding by following a fair procedure. The structured facts do not detail the specific procedural failings, but the tribunal's application of the Polkey principle suggests that a fair process would have led to the same outcome. Employers should ensure they follow their own disciplinary policies, give employees a chance to respond, and consider all relevant evidence before making a decision.
Why this result matters
This case illustrates the importance of the Polkey principle and contributory conduct in reducing compensation. Even when a dismissal is found unfair, the amount awarded can be reduced or eliminated if the employee's behaviour contributed to the dismissal or if the employer would have dismissed them fairly anyway. For employees, this means that pursuing multiple weak claims can backfire, and that their own conduct during employment is a critical factor in any subsequent tribunal claim.
Similar cases
Unfair dismissal and victimisation: former employee awarded £88,519
A former employee of Verifone UK Ltd has been awarded £88,519 after an employment tribunal upheld her claims of unfair dismissal and victimisation, while dismissing her race discrimination complaints.
Sales manager dismissed in flawed redundancy process wins £4,105 after 80% Polkey cut
A 66-year-old sales manager with 7 years' service was unfairly dismissed after a flawed redundancy consultation during the pandemic, but the tribunal reduced his compensation by 80% because he would likely have been dismissed anyway.
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.
Unfair dismissal and unpaid notice: a procedural failure that cost £8,000
A former employee was unfairly dismissed and denied proper notice pay and annual leave. The tribunal awarded £8,000 after finding the employer failed to follow a fair process.