Hamer v Kaltz Ltd: EAT 4 Aug 2014

EAT Unfair Dismissal – Contributory fault – Polkey deduction – The Employment Tribunal found the Claimant’s dismissal to be unfair because the principal reason was that the employee made a protected disclosure (section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996). Initially it made a basic award of andpound;3,325 and a compensatory award of andpound;30,616. The matter was remitted to it by the Employment Appeal Tribunal to consider and give reasons in respect of Polkey and conduct. On remission it made no compensatory award, holding by way of Polkey finding that the Claimant would inevitably have been dismissed on the same date. It found that there should be a 10% reduction in the basic award for conduct. On appeal again, it was held that it was impossible to see how the Employment Tribunal reconciled its Polkey finding with other findings in its original Liability Reasons and in the reasons it gave for reducing the award for conduct by just 10%. The Employment Tribunal’s Reasons did not meet the minimum requisite standard. The appeal was accordingly allowed. A cross-appeal on the conduct issue was dismissed. The parties invited the Employment Appeal Tribunal to make its own assessment on the Polkey issue: the assessment was that there should be a 40% reduction.

David Richardson J
[2014] UKEAT 0502 – 13 – 0408
England and Wales


Updated: 21 December 2021; Ref: scu.536695