The Claimant was dismissed after she failed to notify the school where she was working of her association with a convicted sex offender. The ET found that the dismissal was procedurally unfair but applied a 90% Polkey reduction to any compensation and reduced it by 100% for contributory fault. The Claimant's appeal to the EAT failed (read the judgment here and she appealed to the Court of Appeal (read the judgment here which also failed. She then took her case to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. The tribunal was entitled to conclude that it was a reasonable response for the panel to have concluded that the Claimant's non-disclosure not only amounted to a breach of duty but also merited her dismissal. For her refusal to accept that she had been in breach of duty suggested a continuing lack of insight which, as it was reasonable to conclude, rendered it inappropriate for her to continue to run the school.

Read the full text of the judgment on Bailii