判决理由
An employer cannot argue that a failure to follow a fair procedure made no difference to the outcome (the 'no difference' principle is rejected). However, if the tribunal finds that the employee would or might have been dismissed anyway even if a fair procedure had been followed, compensation may be reduced accordingly.
事实
Mr Polkey was made redundant without any prior warning or consultation. His employer argued that consultation would have made no difference — the redundancy was inevitable.
判决摘要
The House of Lords held that the dismissal was procedurally unfair. An employer cannot avoid a finding of unfair dismissal by arguing that proper procedures would not have changed the result. However, the tribunal can reduce compensation to reflect the chance that the employee would have been dismissed in any event.
关键引述
"An employer having prima facie grounds to dismiss will not be acting reasonably in treating those grounds as sufficient if he has failed to adopt the appropriate procedure."
— Lord Bridge
后续处理
Consistently applied. A 'Polkey deduction' (percentage reduction in compensation to reflect the chance of fair dismissal) is a standard feature of employment tribunal remedies.