Evans v Brent London Borough Council

The mere absence of a monetary remedy does not render a finding of unfair dismissal valueless. Rather, a tribunal may still determine whether dismissal was procedurally or substantively unfair.

Accordingly, an ET should not strike out an unfair dismissal claim in its entirety where there is a real prospect of a finding of unfair dismissal on procedural grounds, even if no compensation can be recovered.

The claimant appealed the Watford Employment Tribunal's decision to strike out his unfair dismissal claim. The ET had accepted that a High Court judgment was binding and that most substantive aspects lacked prospects of success. The ET nonetheless found a limited prospect of success on procedural unfairness arising from the refusal to adjourn a disciplinary hearing. The ET struck out the whole claim because it concluded there was no prospect of any financial remedy and no declaratory remedy under the statute. The Employment Appeal Tribunal considered whether that approach was lawful and whether the ET had misapplied precedent.

1. Employment Appeal Tribunal — Appeal allowed in part; strike out set aside insofar as it related to procedural unfairness arising from the failure to adjourn the disciplinary hearing (6 March 2020).
2. Employment Tribunal, Watford — Reserved judgment striking out whole unfair dismissal claim (Employment Judge R Lewis, sitting alone, 24 April 2019) (sent out 17 May 2019).
3. High Court (QBD) — Substantive commercial/asset recovery proceedings between the parties; judgments of Zacaroli J (17 August and 15 November 2018) held to be binding on the ET ([2018] EWHC 2214).