Cases→3306013/2024

Claimant v Mr Peter Howett trading as British Meat

28 May 2025Before Employment Judge HarrisonReadingin person

Outcome

Claimant succeeds£10,022

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalsucceeded

The tribunal found the dismissal was unfair because the respondent failed to follow a fair procedure. There was a 50% chance the claimant would have been fairly dismissed had proper procedures been followed, but the procedural failures rendered the dismissal unfair. The respondent also failed to follow the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures.

Facts

Mr Gregory was dismissed by Mr Howett trading as British Meat. The respondent failed to follow a fair dismissal procedure and did not comply with the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures. The claimant had engaged in some conduct that contributed to his dismissal. He subsequently found new employment but with additional commuting costs and lower pension contributions.

Decision

The tribunal found the dismissal was unfair due to procedural failures. However, significant adjustments were made: a 50% Polkey reduction reflecting the chance of fair dismissal, a 10% ACAS uplift for procedural breaches, and a 50% contributory fault reduction for the claimant's conduct. The final awards were £8,963 basic award and £1,059 compensatory award.

Practical note

Even where unfair dismissal is established, substantial reductions for Polkey, contributory conduct and ACAS adjustments can result in awards significantly lower than the initial calculation, with the claimant receiving only about £10,000 despite winning the claim.

Award breakdown

Basic award£8,963
Compensatory award£1,059
Pension loss£1,353

Adjustments

Polkey reduction50%

50% chance that the claimant would have been fairly dismissed if the respondent had followed a fair procedure in dismissing him

Contributory fault50%

Just and equitable to reduce the basic and compensatory awards by 50% because of the claimant's conduct before the dismissal

ACAS uplift+10%

Respondent's failure to follow the requirements of the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures in respect of the claimant's dismissal

Legal authorities cited

Polkey v A E Dayton Services Ltd [1988] ICR 142

Statutes

Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 s.207A(2)

Case details

Case number
3306013/2024
Decision date
28 May 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
2
Classification
contested

Respondent

Name
Mr Peter Howett trading as British Meat
Sector
manufacturing
Represented
No

Employment details

Claimant representation

Represented
No
Search for this judgment on GOV.UK →