Back to Glossary

Employment Tribunals Last modified: October 24, 2025

impact hr ident
Employment Tribunals

SECTION GUIDE

What is an Employment Tribunal?

An Employment Tribunal (ET) is an independent judicial body that resolves workplace disputes between employers and employees in the UK.

Tribunals handle cases involving employment rights, discrimination, and workplace fairness under employment law.

They exist to ensure both parties are treated lawfully and fairly — acting as a specialist court system for employment-related issues.

Common cases include:

  • Unfair or constructive dismissal
  • Discrimination (sex, race, age, disability, religion, belief)
  • Unpaid wages or holiday pay
  • Redundancy pay disputes
  • Whistleblowing and victimisation

Unlike civil courts, tribunals are designed to be more accessible — but they remain formal legal settings with binding outcomes and public judgments.

Why Employment Tribunals matter for employers

Employment Tribunals are more than just legal hearings — they represent a key measure of how well an organisation upholds fairness, process, and compliance.

  • Financial and operational cost

    • Defending a tribunal claim can be expensive, even when successful.
    • Legal fees, lost productivity, and reputational risk can turn a single claim into a six-figure problem for SMEs.

    Time and productivity impact

    • Tribunal claims typically last 6–12 months, consuming hours of senior management and HR preparation.
    • Each case can require 40–100 hours of evidence gathering, document review, and witness coordination.

    Reputation and transparency

    • All judgments are published on Gov.uk Employment Tribunal Decisions
    • For SMEs, even one claim can affect client confidence or recruitment if potential hires search your business name online.

    Culture and employer brand

    • Tribunal disputes often indicate deeper cultural or management issues — poor communication, inconsistency, or lack of documentation.
    • Handled correctly, they can become catalysts for change: improving leadership practices, communication, and documentation standards.

  • Employment Tribunal Awards (2023/24)

    Claim Type Maximum Award Average (Mean) Award Median Award
    Unfair Dismissal £179,000 £14,000 £6,746
    Sex Discrimination £995,000 £53,403 £16,161
    Race Discrimination £431,768 £29,532 £10,253
    Disability Discrimination £964,465 £44,483 £17,218
    Religion or Belief Discrimination £20,000 £10,750 £8,500
    Age Discrimination £261,949 £102,891 £86,349

    Data drawn from the UK Government’s official publication:
    “Tribunal Statistics Quarterly: April to June 2024” (Ministry of Justice / HMCTS) and accompanying dataset Employment and Employment Appeal Tribunal Tables 2023–24.

The Employment Tribunal Process

The process typically involves five main stages.

Early Conciliation (ACAS)Reveal

What Happens:
Before submitting a claim, employees must contact ACAS to start Early Conciliation — a mandatory pre-claim step.

An ACAS conciliator contacts both parties to explore settlement options confidentially.

Timeline:
Up to 6 weeks (4 weeks standard + 2-week extension if both agree)

Employer Action:

  • Respond promptly to ACAS and engage professionally.
  • Consider early settlement (via a legally binding COT3 agreement).
  • Gather documentation and assess claim validity.
  • Seek HR or legal advice before negotiating.

Claim Submission (ET1) and Response (ET3)Reveal

What Happens:
If conciliation fails, the employee (claimant) files an ET1 claim form.

The Tribunal serves it on the employer (respondent), who must reply via an ET3 form within 28 days.

Employer Action:

  • Act immediately — late ET3s can result in automatic loss.
  • Involve HR/legal advisors to craft a clear, evidence-based defence.
  • Identify witnesses and start collecting documentation.
  • Avoid emotional or informal internal discussions — everything may be disclosed later.

Case Management & PreparationReveal

What Happens:
Once accepted, the Tribunal issues a Case Management Order outlining deadlines and evidence requirements.
This stage often includes:

  • Disclosure – exchange of documents between parties
  • Witness statements – written evidence from relevant staff
  • Preliminary hearings – clarifying legal points or eligibility
  • Bundle preparation – compiling indexed evidence for the hearing

Employer Action:

  • Meet all Tribunal deadlines — missing one damages credibility.
  • Ensure all documents are consistent and complete.
  • Draft factual, signed witness statements — avoid assumptions or opinion.
  • Prepare a Chronology of Events to support your case.
  • Keep communication respectful — tone matters.

Tribunal HearingReveal

What Happens:
A formal hearing takes place before an Employment Judge (sometimes with two lay members).

Each side presents its case, witnesses give sworn evidence, and cross-examination follows.

Employer Action:

  • Ensure your witnesses are fully briefed and confident with questioning.
  • Keep your demeanour professional and factual throughout.
  • Bring multiple copies of your bundle, witness statements, and summary.
  • Remain open to settlement — negotiations can still occur mid-hearing.
  • If remote, ensure reliable tech and a quiet environment.

Judgment and RemediesReveal

What Happens:
After closing arguments, the Judge issues a written judgment, sometimes days or weeks later.
If the claimant wins, possible outcomes include:

  • Compensation (financial award)
  • Reinstatement (return to job)
  • Declaration of rights (formal recognition of wrongdoing)

Employer Action:

  • Review the judgment with HR/legal advisors promptly.
  • If required, pay any compensation within the deadline.
  • Consider appealing to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) if there’s a legal error.
  • Debrief internally to capture learning and prevent recurrence.
  • Update internal policies or manager training based on findings.
Employment Tribunals

Landmark Employment Tribunal Cases: Lessons for Employers

Employment law doesn’t stand still — it evolves with every new tribunal judgment.

For UK employers, keeping up with landmark Employment Tribunal and court cases isn’t just about legal compliance; it’s about understanding what fairness, consistency, and accountability look like in practice.

Each year, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT), the Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court deliver rulings that redefine how key principles — such as discrimination, belief, worker status, and whistleblowing protection — apply in the modern workplace.

These decisions ripple through HR policy, people management, and risk strategy, often setting the benchmark for what constitutes a reasonable employer response.

By learning from these high-profile cases, SMEs can spot potential red flags in their own organisations and take proactive steps to prevent similar disputes.

The cases below illustrate how tribunals interpret fairness, documentation, and managerial conduct — and they show how one small oversight can become a six-figure liability if procedures aren’t robust.

Employment Tribunal Cases

  • Allay (UK) Ltd v Gehlen UKEAT/0031/20/AT (4 February 2021)

    The claimant, Mr Gehlen (of Indian origin), was employed by the respondent and was dismissed for performance reasons in September 2017. He later brought a claim of racial harassment by a colleague. The tribunal found that the colleague had made repeated racist comments (for example: remarks about working in a corner shop, “like all Indians”, etc.). The employer relied on the statutory defence under §109(4) of the Equality Act 2010 (“that the employer had taken all reasonable steps”). The training and policies the employer pointed to dated from 2015 and had not been refreshed. The tribunal (and the Employment Appeal Tribunal) held that the training was stale and thus the defence failed.

    Lessons for employers:

    • Having a diversity/anti-harassment policy and one round of training does not guarantee you have “taken all reasonable steps”.
    • The law requires not just training per se, but effective, up-to-date training. The EAT emphasised the step’s effectiveness and its continuing impact.
    • Employers should schedule regular refresher training and monitor whether training has been understood by employees; otherwise the “reasonable steps” defence becomes weak.

    Link to judgment: Allay (UK) Ltd v Mr S Gehlen: UKEAT/0031/20/AT

  • Uber BV v Aslam [2021] UKSC 5 (19 February 2021)

    The claimants, Yaseen Aslam and others, worked as drivers for Uber. The written contracts described them as self-employed “partners”. The courts looked beyond the contract and found that Uber exercised sufficient control (fares fixed, routes dictated, drivers unable to negotiate, etc.). The Supreme Court held that they were “workers” under the Employment Rights Act 1996 s 230(3)(b) and thus entitled to rights such as the National Minimum Wage and holiday pay.

    Lessons for employers:

    • The legal status of a worker depends on the reality of the working relationship, not merely what the contract says.
    • In sectors using flexible labour or gig economy models, employers or labour providers must carefully review job design, control, supervision, substitution rights, and working-time arrangements.

    Link to judgment: Uber BV and others (Appellants) v Aslam and others (Respondents)

  • Forstater v CGD Europe [2021] EAT (12 June 2021)

    The claimant, Maya Forstater, held “gender-critical” beliefs (i.e., belief that sex is biologically determined and cannot change). She lost her contract with the employer after expressing those views. The Employment Appeal Tribunal held that her belief qualified as a “philosophical belief” protected under the Equality Act 2010.

    Lessons for employers:

    • Protected beliefs may include philosophical views which are not mainstream — and employers must treat them as such.
    • Employers cannot simply dismiss someone for holding a protected belief. The focus must be on the manifestation of the belief (conduct) and whether the employer’s response is proportionate.
    • Policies should address how belief-expression (especially outside work or on social media) is managed, with attention to proportionality, reputation risk, and competing rights.

    Link to judgment: Maya Forstater v CGD Europe and Others: UKEAT/0105/20/JOJ

  • Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti [2019] UKSC 55 (27 November 2019)

    The claimant, Ms Jhuti, raised a protected disclosure (whistleblowing) about alleged misuse of incentives at Royal Mail Group Ltd. The employer’s manager fabricated a performance issue to cover up the real reason for dismissal. The Supreme Court held that the employer’s “true reason” (the whistleblowing) should be attributed to the person who dismissed her, even if that person was not aware of the disclosure.

    Lessons for employers:

    • Hidden motives in dismissal decisions can invalidate a dismissal defence — the “Jhuti principle” means that if the real reason for dismissal is a protected disclosure (even if not known by the decision-maker), the dismissal may be automatically unfair.
    • Employers must ensure that investigations, dismissals and decision-making are transparent, fully documented and avoid any manipulation of reason.
    • HR professionals should be aware of the possibility of “innocent decision-maker” dismissal scenarios and ensure the chain of decision-making is clear.

    Link to judgment: Royal Mail Group Ltd (Respondent) v Jhuti (Appellant)

  • Employment Tribunals

  • Higgs v Farmor’s School [2025] EWCA Civ 109 (12 February 2025)

    Mrs Kristie Higgs was employed by Farmor’s School as a pastoral administrator. She made private posts on her personal Facebook account expressing gender-critical views (that gender is biologically determined, that same-sex marriage is not equivalent to opposite sex). A complaint was made to the school, she was investigated and dismissed for gross misconduct. The Court of Appeal held that her dismissal amounted to unlawful direct discrimination on grounds of belief. They emphasised that expression of protected belief, even if controversial, is protected, and that reputational risk alone did not justify the dismissal.

    Lessons for employers:

    • Beliefs (religious or philosophical) are protected under the Equality Act 2010. Expression of those beliefs may also be protected.
    • Employers must carry out a proportionality assessment when dealing with manifestation of belief issues — is dismissal the only reasonable and necessary response?
    • Use of social media by employees can trigger issues of belief, expression, reputation and fairness — HR must carefully balance rights and obligations, and document decisions well.

    Link to judgment: Higgs -v- Farmor’s School

Employment Tribunals

How to Prevent Employment Tribunal Claims

Build a Culture of Fairness and TrustReveal

Why it matters:

Most tribunal cases stem from a sense of injustice — not always from the act itself, but how it was handled. Employees who feel ignored or dismissed are far more likely to escalate issues formally.

What good looks like:

  • Hold regular one-to-ones and feedback sessions to stay connected to your team.
  • Provide clear channels for staff to raise concerns confidentially.
  • Model transparency from the top — leadership behaviour sets the tone.
  • Encourage managers to use a problem-solving mindset, not a defensive one.

Follow the ACAS Code of PracticeReveal

Why it matters:

The ACAS Code of Practice sets the national standard for handling disciplinary and grievance procedures. Employment Tribunals can increase compensation by up to 25 % if an employer fails to follow it.

Key principles of compliance:

  • Provide clear written allegations and sufficient notice before hearings.
  • Allow employees to be accompanied by a colleague or trade-union rep.
  • Investigate impartially and gather all sides of the story.
  • Offer a fair appeal process with an independent reviewer.

Common pitfalls:

  • Skipping investigation stages due to “obvious” guilt.
  • Using different standards for different employees.
  • Failing to confirm decisions in writing.

Document EverythingReveal

Why it matters:

In tribunal proceedings, the phrase “If it’s not written down, it didn’t happen” is brutally true. Good records show that decisions were fair, consistent, and evidence-based.

What to document:

  • Signed employment contracts and job descriptions.
  • Performance records — appraisals, feedback, improvement plans.
  • Disciplinary notes and witness statements.
  • Training records, particularly around equality and health & safety.
  • Redundancy selection criteria and consultation evidence.

How to manage records:

Use secure, cloud-based HR software such as Breathe HR to store all documents with timestamps and version control.

Train and Empower Line ManagersReveal

Why it matters:

Most disputes begin at manager level. A single poor conversation can undo months of trust. Well-trained managers reduce legal risk and boost morale.

Essential training areas:

  • Conducting disciplinary and grievance meetings.
  • Managing absence and flexible working fairly.
  • Understanding unconscious bias and discrimination.
  • Communicating difficult messages with empathy.

Use Early Resolution and MediationReveal

Why it matters:

The longer a dispute goes unresolved, the greater the risk of a formal claim.

ACAS Early Conciliation and independent mediation are proven ways to resolve issues quickly and privately.

Approach:

  • Encourage open dialogue at the first sign of conflict.
  • Offer voluntary mediation with a neutral facilitator.
  • If unresolved, engage ACAS before a formal claim is lodged.

Benefits:

  • Protects relationships and morale.
  • Saves legal costs.
  • Demonstrates reasonableness to any future tribunal.

Refresh Training RegularlyReveal

Why it matters:

In Allay (UK) Ltd v Gehlen (2021), the tribunal found that diversity training from several years earlier was ineffective and too old to protect the employer.

Best practice:

  • Refresh equality, diversity, and anti-harassment training every 12–18 months.
  • Keep attendance records and course materials.
  • Reinforce messages through team meetings and leadership modelling.

Audit HR Policies AnnuallyReveal

Why it matters:

Employment law evolves constantly. The upcoming Employment Rights Bill 2024–25 introduces new obligations around family leave, flexible working, and harassment prevention.

Audit checklist:

  • Employment contracts and staff handbook.
  • Grievance, disciplinary, and capability procedures.
  • Equal opportunities and harassment policies.
  • Flexible working and hybrid-working frameworks.
  • Data protection and record-keeping protocols.

Offer Clear Exit and Settlement OptionsReveal

Why it matters:

Sometimes relationships can’t be repaired. Settlement Agreements allow both parties to part ways amicably, preventing drawn-out litigation.

Employer best practice:

  • Approach with empathy and clarity.
  • Offer payment terms that reflect risk, notice, and goodwill.
  • Ensure the employee receives independent legal advice (a legal requirement).
  • Confirm confidentiality and non-disparagement clauses clearly.

Seek Expert HR SupportReveal

Why it matters:

SMEs often lack the internal capacity to navigate complex HR disputes confidently.

External HR experts bring objectivity, legal insight, and calm under pressure.

impact HR can help you:

  • Conduct early risk assessments.
  • Manage ACAS conciliation and settlement discussions.
  • Represent your organisation at tribunal (through legal partners).
  • Deliver policy reviews and leadership training to prevent recurrence.

Tribunal prevention isn’t about fear — it’s about confidence. When processes are fair, training is current, and culture is open, claims don’t just decrease — engagement and performance rise impact HR Insight

Common Mistakes That Lead to Tribunal Claims

Even well-intentioned employers can stumble into tribunal territory through everyday oversights.

Tribunal judges look not just at what decision was made — but how it was made.

Below are some of the most common mistakes that put UK employers at risk, and how to avoid them.

  • Verbal Warnings with No Written Record

    Why it’s risky:

    • A conversation that isn’t documented can easily be disputed later.
    • In the absence of written evidence, tribunals tend to favour the employee’s version of events.

    Example:

    • A manager verbally warned an employee about poor attendance but didn’t record it. When the employee was later dismissed for repeated absence, they argued they’d never been warned — and the tribunal agreed.

    How to prevent it:

    • Record every warning in writing, even if informal.
    • Follow your disciplinary policy and confirm outcomes by email or letter.
    • Keep notes of informal chats that address conduct or performance — they show fairness and consistency.

  • Inconsistent Disciplinary Treatment

    Why it’s risky:

    • Tribunals expect similar behaviour to lead to similar outcomes.
    • When one employee is dismissed for conduct that another received only a warning for, it raises red flags of unfairness or discrimination.

    Example:

    • Two team members were involved in the same misconduct incident. One was dismissed, the other retained. The employer couldn’t justify the inconsistency — the dismissal was ruled unfair.

    How to prevent it:

    • Apply policies consistently across all departments and managers.
    • Train managers to use objective criteria, not personal judgment.
    • Keep a central HR log of previous disciplinary outcomes to benchmark decisions.

  • Redundancies Without Consultation

    Why it’s risky:

    • Redundancy is one of the most common causes of tribunal claims.
    • Even if the business case is strong, failing to consult properly with affected staff makes the process procedurally unfair.

    Example:

    • An SME decided to reduce headcount quickly to cut costs but announced redundancies without a formal consultation period. The tribunal found the dismissals unfair due to lack of meaningful dialogue.

    How to prevent it:

    • Hold at least one individual consultation meeting with each at-risk employee.
    • Provide written reasons, selection criteria, and opportunity to suggest alternatives.
    • For 20+ redundancies, follow collective consultation rules and inform the Redundancy Payments Service (RPS).

  • Ignored Harassment or Bullying Complaints

    Why it’s risky:

    Example:

    • An employee reported ongoing sexist remarks to their manager, who brushed it off as “banter.” The employee later brought a successful harassment claim — the company had no record of investigation or follow-up.

    How to prevent it:

    • Take every complaint seriously, even informal ones.
    • Record, investigate, and conclude complaints within reasonable timeframes.
    • Provide EDI and harassment training for all staff, with clear reporting routes.

  • Outdated or Missing Policies

    Why it’s risky:

    • Policies are your compliance backbone. Without them, you can’t demonstrate fairness or consistency. Outdated handbooks — particularly pre-2020 versions — often omit new legal duties, exposing employers to unnecessary risk.

    Example:

    • A company relied on a disciplinary policy last updated in 2015. It made no reference to remote working, GDPR, or modern flexible-working rights. When a hybrid-work dispute arose, the tribunal criticised the employer’s “out-of-date procedural framework.”

    How to prevent it:

    • Review policies at least annually or after any legal change.
    • Include core documents: Disciplinary, Grievance, Equality, Flexible Working, and Social Media.
    • Involve HR and line managers in updates to ensure practicality as well as compliance.
  • Employment Tribunals

Your Questions Answered

Everything you need to know about Employment Tribunals

  • What is an Employment Tribunal and when might an employee make a claim?Reveal

    An Employment Tribunal is a specialist court that decides workplace disputes about employment rights, such as unfair dismissal, discrimination, unpaid wages, or redundancy.

    An employee can usually bring a claim if they believe their legal rights have been breached — for example, if they were dismissed unfairly, treated unequally, or not paid correctly.

  • How long do Employment Tribunal cases take?Reveal

    Most cases take 6–12 months from claim to judgment, although complex discrimination or whistleblowing cases can take longer.

    Early conciliation through ACAS can often resolve matters within weeks, helping both sides avoid a full hearing.

  • How much does an Employment Tribunal cost employers?Reveal

    There’s no set fee, but defending a claim typically costs £8,000–£10,000 in legal fees alone, according to the British Chambers of Commerce.

    If a claim is upheld, compensation can range from a few thousand pounds to six-figure sums — especially in discrimination or whistleblowing cases.

  • What are the most common reasons employees bring tribunal claims?Reveal

    The most frequent claims are for unfair dismissal, discrimination, unlawful deduction from wages, breach of contract, and redundancy pay disputes.

    Failure to follow correct process — particularly during dismissals or grievances — is one of the biggest triggers for litigation.

  • Can employers settle before going to tribunal?Reveal

    Yes. In fact, most cases are resolved before reaching a hearing.

    Employers can settle via ACAS Early Conciliation or a legally binding Settlement Agreement.

    These options save time, cost, and protect reputation, while allowing both parties to move on professionally.

  • What happens if an employer loses a tribunal case?Reveal

    If you lose, the tribunal may order you to:

    • Pay compensation to the employee (sometimes with no upper limit)
    • Reinstate or re-engage the employee
    • Pay interest and, in rare cases, the claimant’s costs

    It’s essential to review the judgment, comply with any orders, and update internal practices to prevent recurrence.

  • How can an employer reduce the risk of tribunal claims?Reveal

    Follow these key steps:

    • Apply fair and consistent processes based on the ACAS Code of Practice
    • Keep clear documentation of all decisions
    • Train managers regularly on HR best practice
    • Use mediation or conciliation early to resolve issues
    • Conduct annual HR policy audits to ensure compliance

    Partnering with a specialist such as impact HR provides added confidence and ongoing support.

  • What are some common mistakes that lead to tribunal claims?Reveal

    Common pitfalls include:

    • Giving verbal warnings without written evidence
    • Applying inconsistent disciplinary outcomes
    • Failing to consult properly in redundancies
    • Ignoring harassment or bullying complaints
    • Relying on outdated or missing HR policies

    Avoiding these requires proactive management, documentation, and up-to-date training.

  • Where can I find official data on Employment Tribunal awards?Reveal

    The UK Government publishes detailed statistics every quarter.

    The most recent report, Tribunal Statistics Quarterly: April–June 2024, shows:

    • Average unfair dismissal award: £14,000
    • Maximum award: £179,000
    • Discrimination claims: average awards ranging £29,000–£53,000

  • How can impact HR help if I receive an Employment Tribunal claim?Reveal

    impact HR provides complete HR and legal-support partnership services, including:

    • Early risk assessment and response strategy
    • Drafting ET3 responses and preparing evidence bundles
    • ACAS conciliation and Settlement Agreement support
    • Tribunal representation via our legal partners
    • Post-case reviews and staff training to prevent recurrence

Where to find out more A collection of hand-picked useful resources for Employment Tribuanls from impact HR and beyond

Make an enquiry

Let’s talk

Start making your impact.

Whether you need day-to-day HR support, ad-hoc support or a long-term partner, we’re here to help.

Get in touch for a free initial chat — no pressure, just practical advice from people who get it.

0330 2369866
hello@impacthr.co.uk

Leicester: 6 St. Georges Way, 3rd Floor, St. George’s House, Leicester LE1 1QZ
London: 167 City Road, London EC1V 1AW
Leeds: Building 3, City West Business Park, Gelderd Rd, Holbeck, Leeds LS12 6LN
Essex: Halford House, 2 Coval Lane, Chelmsford, England, CM1 1TD

You may also like Explore more content to keep you informed and up to date with the latest HR resources

  • article  /  15th Jul 2025

    Employment Law Case Spotlight: £187,585 Awarded in Blewitt v Mach Recruitment (2025)

    View article

  • legal update  /  6th Mar 2025

    Employment Rights Bill 2024: New Updates for SMEs

    View legal update

  • article  /  28th Apr 2025

    Equality Act Update: Supreme Court Clarifies Definition of Sex

    View article

  • legal update  /  7th Oct 2025

    Forklift truck accident: Ipswich firm fined £30,000

    View legal update