The way an unfair dismissal process is handled can have a significant impact on the overall outcome.

An employment tribunal case involving Estcourt v Morrison Energy Services Ltd highlights this clearly.

The case resulted in a significant compensation award following a finding of unfair dismissal. It was then followed by a separate costs judgment, where the tribunal examined how the employer conducted itself during the proceedings.

Taken together, the outcomes show that risk does not sit in one moment. It develops across the full process, shaped by both the decision itself and how the situation is managed afterwards.

 

The Case in Brief

The case involved a claim of unfair dismissal brought by Mr Estcourt against Morrison Energy Services Limited.

The claim arose following the claimant’s dismissal after raising concerns which were found to amount to protected disclosures. The tribunal considered whether the dismissal was linked to those disclosures and how the employer had responded to the situation.

The tribunal found that the dismissal was automatically unfair and the claimant was awarded compensation of £66,295.11. In reaching its decision, the tribunal examined not just the events themselves, but how the employer had handled the situation and its response to the concerns raised.

Following the main judgment, a separate hearing took place to consider a costs application made by the claimant.

In that later judgment, the tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £1,800 in costs to the claimant.

This cost award did not relate to the dismissal itself. Instead, it reflected the tribunal’s findings that the respondent had acted unreasonably in the way it conducted the proceedings.

Taken together, the case highlights how risk can arise at different stages. First, in the dismissal decision itself. Then, in how the employer handled the process that followed.

 

The Tribunal’s Findings on Conduct

In considering the costs application, the tribunal applied the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure.

These rules allow for costs to be awarded where a party has acted unreasonably in the way proceedings have been conducted.

The tribunal identified several issues with the respondent’s conduct.

These included a failure to engage constructively in settlement discussions, unclear or confusing correspondence, and a lack of cooperation in preparing documentation for the hearing. There were also delays in responding to requests and progressing the case.

The tribunal described the approach as obstructive rather than collaborative.

It also found that this conduct led to additional time and cost for the claimant’s representative. As a result, a costs award was considered appropriate.

Importantly, the tribunal noted that costs in employment tribunal cases are not intended to punish. They are compensatory and are designed to address unnecessary expense caused by unreasonable behaviour.

 

Looking Beyond the Decision

At a surface level, this case could be seen as an unfair dismissal claim followed by a relatively modest costs award.

However, when viewed together, the two outcomes highlight something more significant about the unfair dismissal process.

The initial risk arose from the dismissal itself, resulting in a substantial compensation award.
A second layer of risk developed over time. This was driven by how the employer engaged with the process after the claim had been brought.

This included how it communicated, how it responded to requests, and how it worked with the other party to move the case forward.

The case did not create risk in a single moment. It created risk across the full timeline.

 

What This Means for the Unfair Dismissal Process

For employers and those advising them, this case reinforces that the unfair dismissal process extends beyond the point of dismissal.

It includes the steps leading up to a decision, the way that decision is communicated, and how any concerns or disputes are handled afterwards.

Each stage plays a role in shaping the overall outcome.

In practice, this means that even where there are genuine concerns about an issue, the way those concerns are managed still matters.

The process needs to be clear, consistent, and documented. It also needs to be capable of being explained if challenged.

This is not simply about following a procedure. It is about demonstrating that decisions have been reached in a reasonable and proportionate way, particularly where concerns have been raised by employees.

 

The Role of Communication and Conduct

One of the more notable aspects of this case is that the costs award was driven by behaviour that may not always be recognised as high risk.

This included delayed responses, unclear communication, and a lack of engagement with the process.

Individually, these actions can seem minor. However, when considered together, they can influence how a case is viewed.

The tribunal assessed the overall pattern of behaviour rather than focusing on isolated incidents.

This reflects a broader expectation that organisations will approach proceedings in a professional and constructive way.

 

Supporting Clients Through the Process

For independent HR professionals, this case highlights the importance of supporting clients throughout the full unfair dismissal process.

This often involves helping clients structure conversations, document decisions, and communicate clearly.

It also includes guiding them on how to engage with claims in a measured and professional way.

In many situations, the issue is not whether a concern exists. It is whether the process around that concern has been handled appropriately.

 

Key Takeaways

• The unfair dismissal process is assessed as a whole, not just at the point of dismissal
• A fair and lawful outcome depends on how concerns are handled, not just the decision made
• Conduct during tribunal proceedings can create additional risk
• Communication, tone, and responsiveness all influence how a case is viewed
• Costs awards can arise where behaviour is considered unreasonable

 

What this highlights

This case shows that risk in employment matters is rarely contained within a single decision.

It develops over time, shaped by how situations are handled at each stage of the process.

For employers and advisers, this places greater emphasis on consistency, clarity, and professional judgement across the full unfair dismissal process.

With upcoming changes to unfair dismissal, scrutiny around these processes is only set to increase.

Read more in these reflections from our webinar with Freeths on Unfair Dismissal Reform.