Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

This case is one which concerns unfair dismissal and how the Employment Tribunal should deal with issues of contributory fault when liability has been determined and remedy is being deliberated. The Employment Tribunal failed to identify how the Claimant’s conduct could have been blameworthy, stated that he was at fault for issues he could not have been at fault for, and had misunderstood the application of the test of loss of mutual trust and confidence.

The facts in Cox v Northern Devon Healthcare NHS Trust

Mr Cox was employed by the Respondent as a maintenance assistant. He had become concerned about breaches of health and safety which could have put the well-being of patients and others at risk and submitted a grievance utilising the established whistleblowing procedures in place at his workplace in April 2006. In November 2007 the Respondent’s manager called a general meeting in which it was indicated that ill-founded and malicious complaints had been made. It was clear that efforts were being made to identify the source of the complaint. The Claimant was understandably concerned about this and complained to his employer that he should have been able to remain anonymous in his whistleblowing complaint. He further stated to his employer that he would cease working until this latest complaint had been resolved. The employer took his notice of withdrawal from work as a refusal to work and dismissed him on 19 November 2007. The Claimant appealed and the hospital management determined the decision to dismiss the Claimant was wrong. However, the Claimant was unhappy at being reinstated to his former post in the Estates Management department because of criticisms he had made of the running of the department. These issues were not resolved and the Claimant subsequently submitted claims for constructive unfair dismissal and, in the alternative, unfair dismissal.

The Employment Tribunal found that the Claimant had been unfairly constructively dismissed. However, it did consider that the Claimant’s compensation should be reduced by 80% because of his contributory conduct. The Claimant appealed on this point and the Respondent cross-appealed on the basis that the a Polkey reduction should have been applied (that the Claimant would have been dismissed anyway).

The law relating to compensation in unfair dismissal cases

If an employee is unfairly dismissed or unfairly constructively dismissed the award that the Claimant receives is split into two separate, broad heads – the basic award and the compensatory award. The basic award is calculated by multiplying together the Claimant’s length of continuous service, age, and weekly gross pay. The compensatory award is supposed to compensate the Claimant for financial loss relating to the loss of their employment – for example loss of earnings, loss of contractual benefits and the loss of their statutory rights.

Even if a Respondent is found to have unfairly dismissed an employee, there are a number of ways in which compensation can be reduced in an unfair dismissal case. These are:

  1. A failure to mitigate – the employee has a duty to attempt to find new employment as soon as possible after termination. If the employee unreasonably fails to find new employment (i.e. they don’t submit any job applications) then they will be penalised by a reduction in their compensation
  2. A Polkey reduction – Respondents often argue that Polkey reductions should apply – that the employee would have been dismissed anyway but for any procedural unfairness. If the Employment Tribunal believe this is the case then the employee’s compensation will be reduced to the relevant extent
  3. Contributory fault – if the employee is in some way at fault for their dismissal then the amount of compensation can be reduced to reflect this
  4. A failure to follow the ACAS code – if the employee has failed to follow the ACAS code (i.e. by not appealing a dismissal) then their compensation can be reduced to reflect this

The basic award and/or the compensatory award can be reduced (to nothing if the circumstances demand it). For the basic and compensatory award to be reduced it must be just and equitable to do so.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal’s decision in Cox v Northern Devon Healthcare NHS Trust

The Employment Appeal Tribunal held that the Employment Tribunal failed to identify how the Claimant’s conduct could have been blameworthy. The Employment Tribunal had failed to give sufficient reasons on this point. Further, he could not have been at fault for a number of the issues specified by the Employment Tribunal, and the Employment Tribunal had misunderstood the application of the test of loss of mutual trust and confidence.

Our specialist employment solicitors’ thoughts on Cox v Northern Devon Healthcare NHS Trust

This unfair dismissal case highlights how the Employment Tribunal can get things wrong sometimes. It also highlights the potential difference that representation can make in the Employment Tribunal – the Claimant was unrepresented throughout this case (even at the Employment Appeal Tribunal, a brave move) whilst the Respondent was represented by Counsel at the Employment Tribunal and subsequent appeals.

About Chris Hadrill

Chris is a specialist employment lawyer at Redmans. He specialises in contentious and non-contentious employment matters, including breach of contract claims, compromise agreements and Employment Tribunal cases. He writes on employment law matters on a variety of websites, including Direct 2 Lawyers, Lawontheweb.co.uk, LegalVoice, the Justice Gap and his own blog.

Contact Chris by emailing him at chadrill@redmans.co.uk

Share →

Our awards

Request a callback

Your name

Your email

Your telephone number

Contact us

Please feel free to discuss your own position and concerns. Contact your nearest office on:

T: 020 3397 3603
E: enquiries@redmans.co.uk
W: www.redmans.co.uk

Testimonials

4.52 Average

21 Reviews

Redman's provided excellent legal employment advice for me during a difficult time in my employment. Chris was my lawyer, super efficient, quick, reliable and clearly very experienced in the matter. Could not ask for a better law firm to deal with your query if you are in need of some help. Would definitely use them again in the future. Highly recommending Chris.

Posted 1 month ago

Steven

Chris Hadrill was very professional and responsive. I would highly recommend him

Posted 1 month ago

Dinah

Very Efficient, with very quick email reply’s. I had a matter that needed resolving within a very short space of time and Redmans Solicitors were great with dealing with my matter quickly.

Posted 1 month ago

Ankar

At Redmans the solicitor that was dealing with me was Chris. He dealt with my situation smoothly with clear guidance and explanation

Posted 1 month ago

Anonymous

Clear, concise advice and guidance delivered by an experienced and very capable solicitor, within the timelines required

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

Very efficient service. I never had to wIt for more than a day for a reply to any of my queries and the matter was dealt with swiftly.

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

Very timely, thorough and helpful advice. Friendly and considerate of the needs of the client

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

Very prompt and attention to detail. Thank you for the service

Posted 2 months ago

Chris

Couldn’t be happier with how Redmans successfully handled our seemingly tricky case. By being clear and detailed every step of the way, with the utmost professionalism and courtesy, they made it an informative and eye-opening process, taking the stress out of the situation and ultimately delivered what you would want from such a service. I fully appreciate everything they have done, and if I am ever in need of such services in the future, they will be the first number I contact. Excellent.

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

Excellent work delivered with great quality

Posted 2 months ago

Dominic

Chris Hadrill was a great help both in terms of his advice and his expertise. He explained my options to me clearly and concisely enabling me to quickly make the right decision for me in the circumstance. I would not hesitate to recommend Chris or Redmans to friends or colleagues, and would certainly make Redmans my first port of call should I require a similar service in the future.

Posted 2 months ago

Kurt

Redmans gave excellent advice and helped me understand everything in clear concepts. Thank you!

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

Resolved my issues

Posted 2 months ago

Keith

Quick fast professional service.

Posted 2 months ago

Michael

"Prompt, efficient and practical advice that resulted in me getting some additional money tax free."

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

Patient and thorough advice given to me around my Settlement Agreement

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

"Excellent service, getting back to you promptly giving you very good advice."

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

I found Chris Hadrill to be an excellent help, he is very knowledgeable and gives good ,concise ,strategic advice .He makes himself readily accessible when you need him.I would personally highly recommend him.

Posted 2 months ago

Christine

Professional, efficient and reliable service provided. I strongly recommend them and I would use this service again.

Posted 2 months ago