How often do tribunals apply Polkey reductions?
What published unfair dismissal judgments suggest about Polkey reductions, how large they can be, and what that means for a statement of loss.
Applied
6.2%
151 of 2,424 successful or partially successful unfair dismissal cases.
Engaged
18.3%
443 judgments mentioned, applied, or rejected a Polkey point.
Average reduction
63.8%
Range 0% to 100% across 106 clear percentage reductions.
What is a Polkey reduction?
In an unfair dismissal case, a tribunal can decide that the employer used an unfair procedure but that the employee would still have been dismissed, or might still have been dismissed, if a fair procedure had been followed.
That is commonly called a Polkey reduction. It does not mean the dismissal was fair. It means the compensation is reduced to reflect the chance that the employment would have ended anyway.
This matters because a claimant can win unfair dismissal and still see the compensatory award cut sharply. Where a clear percentage was detected, the average reduction was 63.8%.
What Tribunal Intel found
The audit scanned 2,424 successful or partially successful first-instance unfair dismissal decisions. It excluded EAT cases and procedural-only rulings, then focused on published cases where the employee had at least some success.
Polkey was engaged in 443 cases (18.3%). A reduction was detected as applied in 151 cases (6.2%). In another 113 cases, the tribunal appeared to reject or decline a Polkey reduction.
| Year | Scanned | Polkey engaged | Applied | Average reduction |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | 204 | 10.8% | 5.4% | 55.0% |
| 2025 | 926 | 17.7% | 6.5% | 64.7% |
| 2024 | 816 | 14.2% | 4.0% | 75.5% |
| 2023 | 155 | 27.7% | 8.4% | 65.7% |
| 2022 | 118 | 30.5% | 12.7% | 55.2% |
| 2021 | 130 | 30.0% | 9.2% | 50.8% |
Examples where it was applied
100% reduction
The tribunal found the claimant would have been fairly dismissed in any event.
75% chance of fair dismissal
The judgment recorded a 75% chance that dismissal would have happened after a fair process.
50% reduction
The claim succeeded, but compensation was discounted for the chance employment would have ended anyway.
Examples where it was not applied
No basis for a Polkey deduction
The tribunal found the constructive unfair dismissal claim succeeded and rejected a Polkey discount.
No argument advanced
The judgment recorded that the respondent had not advanced a Polkey argument.
No chance of fair dismissal
The tribunal found there was no chance the claimant would have been fairly dismissed in any event.
What this means for a loss schedule
If you are preparing a statement of loss, set out the losses you say were caused by the dismissal first. If Polkey is relevant, model it separately as a settlement or risk scenario, so it is clear what you are claiming and what the award might look like if the tribunal applies a discount.
For claimants, the statement of loss should normally start from the full claim. Polkey is better treated as a settlement or risk scenario unless you are deliberately making a concession. For employers, the key question is evidence: what fair process should have happened, and what would probably have happened after it?
Was this useful?
No comments yet