EAT Unfair Dismissal : Compensation- Polkey deduction
An ET held that a dismissal (held subsequently, on appeal, to be by reason of redundancy) was unfair because of wholesale failings in respect of selection of the two claimants for dismissal. A conclusion that there was no evidence on which it could make a Polkey deduction, which was in any event two speculative, was overruled on earlier appeal, and the matter remitted to the ET. This was an appeal against a finding of 20% deduction for which no sufficient reasons had been given.
The appeal was allowed on ground of insufficiency of reasons, with observations made about the calculation of Polkey awards as part of the calculation of future loss.
At the invitation of the parties, the EAT assessed the appropriate deduction, on such evidence as there was, as being 33%.
Langstaff P J
[2014] UKEAT 0100 – 14 – 1807
Bailii
England and Wales
Employment, Damages
Updated: 22 December 2021; Ref: scu.537752