Claimant v Mitie Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the complaint of non-payment of a redundancy payment was not well-founded and dismissed this claim.
The tribunal found the complaint of unfair dismissal was well-founded and that the claimant was unfairly dismissed. However, the tribunal applied a 90% Polkey reduction, finding there was a 90% chance the claimant would have been fairly dismissed in any event.
Facts
This was a case involving dismissal in a redundancy context. The claimant, representing himself, brought claims for unfair dismissal and non-payment of redundancy pay against his former employer, Mitie Limited. The hearing took place over three days at London South Employment Tribunal in March 2025.
Decision
The tribunal found that while the dismissal was procedurally unfair, there was a 90% chance the claimant would have been fairly dismissed in any event (Polkey reduction). The redundancy payment claim was dismissed as not well-founded, suggesting the claimant may not have qualified for statutory redundancy pay.
Practical note
A finding of unfair dismissal can result in minimal compensation where the tribunal concludes there is a very high likelihood (here 90%) that a fair procedure would have led to the same outcome.
Adjustments
90% chance that the claimant would have been fairly dismissed in any event
Case details
- Case number
- 2304132/2023
- Decision date
- 26 March 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Name
- Mitie Limited
- Sector
- professional services
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No