The Claimant was employed by the Respondent as a field care worker. She was dismissed for gross misconduct following allegations that she had stolen money from a client. The ET found that the dismissal was unfair because of a number of procedural issues (in particular that there should have been an adjournment of the final disciplinary hearing) but that the Claimant was not entitled to any compensation because (a) applying Polkey, if a fair procedure had been followed it was inevitable that she would have been dismissed and/or (b) the compensatory award was reduced by 100% pursuant to section 123(6) of ERA 1996. The ET also dismissed the Claimant’s claim for wrongful dismissal on the basis that she had committed an act of gross misconduct which justified her summary dismissal. The Claimant appealed.

The EAT dismissed the appeal. The EJ was entitled to set compensation at nil both under Polkey and section 123(6) and to reject the claim for wrongful dismissal.