Case 2500502/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Burlinson v Town End Farm Working Men’s Club and Institute Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 2500502/2019
- Decision date
- 21 July 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Morris
- Venue
- North Shields Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss J Burlinson
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss J Burlinson's complaint that her dismissal by Town End Farm Working Men’s Club and Institute Limited was unfair was well-founded. The tribunal held that the dismissal was unfair because the respondent failed to follow a reasonable procedure before deciding to dismiss her, including by not complying with the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures (2015) apart from offering an appeal, which she did not take up.
The tribunal also found that, had a proper procedure been followed, there was a 100% likelihood that the claimant would still have been dismissed fairly. On that basis it applied a 100% reduction to any compensatory award in accordance with Polkey v AE Dayton Services Limited.
The tribunal further found that the claimant's conduct before dismissal made it just and equitable to reduce any basic award to nil, and that the dismissal was wholly caused or contributed to by her actions so that any compensatory award should also be reduced by 100% to nil. As a result, although the unfair dismissal claim succeeded, no compensation or basic award was made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the dismissal unfair under ss. 94 and 98 ERA 1996, but made no monetary award because it applied a 100% Polkey reduction and reduced any basic award and compensatory award to nil because of the claimant's conduct. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £0
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £0
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £0
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
3 references- Sections 94 and 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996
- Polkey v AE Dayton Services Limited
- ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures (2015)
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.