Case 1404304/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Dr J Roche v University of Southampton — 2025
- Case reference
- 1404304/2021
- Decision date
- 16 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Self Appearances
- Venue
- Southampton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Dr J Roche
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal considered remedy issues following an earlier liability judgment, including whether compensation should be adjusted for the ACAS Code, Polkey or Chagger principles, and contributory fault. It held that any award should be increased by 25 per cent where appropriate because of the respondent's unreasonable failure to comply with the relevant Code of Practice.
The tribunal made no Polkey or Chagger reduction. It found that the claimant's conduct contributed to the unfair dismissal and directed a 20 per cent reduction to the unfair dismissal compensatory award only, while making no contributory reduction to any disability discrimination compensation.
The judgment did not set a final award. It stated that directions and a listing for the next stage of the remedy process would follow, and encouraged the parties to consider resolving compensation.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The provided text is a remedy-stage judgment following an earlier liability judgment. It states that dismissal was found unfair and addresses uplift, Polkey, and contributory fault, but does not quantify compensation. | Upheld | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The provided text refers to an unfair and discriminatory dismissal and to compensation for disability discrimination, but the liability judgment text is truncated and no final monetary remedy is given. | Upheld | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
8 references- S.207 TULR(C)A
- S.207A TULR(C)A
- ACAS Code of Practice for Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures
- Kuehne and Nagel Ltd v Cosgrove EAT 0165/13
- Lawless v Print Plus EAT 0333/09
- Slade v Biggs 2022 IRLR 216
- Polkey / Chagger reduction
- Steen v ASP Packaging Limited (2014) ICR 56
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.