Aggravated damages

When discrimination is carried out in a way that is especially malicious, insulting or high-handed, a tribunal can add further compensation on top of the usual injury to feelings award. Aggravated damages are uncommon, but understanding when they apply — and how to plead them — can change the value of a claim.

Are aggravated damages available in all employment tribunal claims?

Aggravated damages are available in discrimination claims under the Equality Act 2010, and in some other tribunal claims where there is a discretion to award compensation for non-financial loss. They are not available in straightforward unfair dismissal claims, where compensation is assessed under the Employment Rights Act 1996 formula rather than equitable principles. The claim must be one where the tribunal has power to award injury to feelings compensation.

What conduct might lead to an award of aggravated damages?

Tribunals have awarded aggravated damages where the employer dismissed an employee in a deliberately humiliating way, where the employer denied discrimination in proceedings while contemporaneous documents showed it clearly occurred, where the employer victimised or harassed the claimant after the original discriminatory act, or where witnesses gave evidence the tribunal found to be deliberately misleading. The key is that the employer's conduct, beyond the discrimination itself, made the claimant's distress significantly worse.

How do aggravated damages relate to the Vento bands for injury to feelings?

The Vento bands set the range for injury to feelings compensation: lower band for less serious cases, middle band for more serious ones, and upper band for the most grave — typically sustained campaigns of discrimination. Aggravated damages are a separate additional amount on top of the injury to feelings award. However, tribunals must avoid double-counting: if conduct that might justify aggravated damages has already pushed the injury to feelings award to the top of a band, the same conduct cannot be used again to justify aggravated damages.

How much are aggravated damages typically worth?

There is no fixed scale. Published tribunal decisions show awards ranging from a few hundred pounds in modest cases to several thousand in the most serious. A commonly cited range in reported EAT decisions is between around £1,000 and £5,000, though they can exceed this in particularly egregious cases. The amount must be proportionate to the additional distress caused by the aggravating conduct, and tribunals are expected to explain their reasoning.

Can I claim aggravated damages if the employer defended the tribunal case aggressively?

Robust defence of tribunal proceedings is not, on its own, grounds for aggravated damages. An employer is entitled to contest a claim and test the evidence. What can give rise to aggravated damages is conduct in litigation that goes beyond legitimate defence: fabricating an alternative account, producing documents the tribunal finds to have been altered, or pursuing a strategy designed to maximise the claimant's distress rather than address the merits of the claim.

Do I need to plead aggravated damages separately?

Yes. You should identify in your ET1, or at least in your remedy schedule, that you are seeking aggravated damages and set out the specific conduct you rely on. A tribunal is unlikely to award them of its own motion if you have not asked for them. The schedule of loss or remedy submissions is the right place to set out the factual basis for the claim and an estimate of the additional compensation sought.

Start My Claim — UK Legal Case Builder

Build and run your own employment tribunal, small claims, scam refund or renters' rights case with Start My Claim.

Last reviewed: June 2026

are additional compensation awarded in discrimination cases where the employer

s conduct was especially

malicious, high-handed or insulting

— they sit within the overall compensation award and are not a separate head of damage, but must be specifically pleaded.

Where this comes from

Equality Act 2010, s.124

— gives tribunals a wide discretion to award compensation including for injury to feelings and, where appropriate, aggravated damages.

Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Shaw

— EAT guidance on the criteria for awarding aggravated damages in employment cases and the importance of avoiding double-counting.

Vento v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police

[2002] EWCA Civ 1871

— Court of Appeal establishing the three-band framework for injury to feelings awards within which aggravated damages sit.

What aggravated damages are — and are not

All discrimination claims that succeed include a component for injury to feelings. The injury to feelings award compensates for the emotional harm — the distress, loss of dignity and upset — caused by the discriminatory treatment. It is assessed within the Vento bands: a lower band for less serious cases, a middle band for more substantial ones, and an upper band for the most grave, typically sustained campaigns of discrimination or treatment that fundamentally affects the claimant

Aggravated damages go further. They are available where, on top of the discrimination itself, the employer

malicious, insulting, oppressive or high-handed

that it substantially compounded the distress caused. The concept comes from the common law of tort — cases involving trespass to the person, defamation and malicious prosecution — and was confirmed to be available in employment discrimination cases by the Employment Appeal Tribunal in

The crucial point is that aggravated damages are not a separate head of compensation, as they would be in a civil court. In employment tribunal they are part of the compensation for non-financial loss — a factor that increases the overall amount, not an independent award alongside it. This creates two practical consequences. First, both the injury to feelings award and any aggravated element must be assessed without double-counting: conduct that has already pushed the injury to feelings figure to the top of a band cannot then be used again to justify a further aggravated damages addition. Second, the tribunal must give reasons for awarding aggravated damages and explain what specific conduct warranted them.

Exemplary or punitive damages

— a different concept, designed to punish the defendant and deter similar conduct — are not available in employment tribunal proceedings. This is a common point of confusion. An employee who wants a tribunal to "send a message" to their employer will not get a punitive award; the most they can achieve is an aggravated element within the compensatory framework.

How it works in practice

Marcus brings a race discrimination claim after being dismissed. During the tribunal hearing, the employer

s HR director gives evidence that Marcus was dismissed for poor performance. The tribunal finds this evidence

deliberately misleading

: the disciplinary file, assembled after Marcus raised a grievance about racial comments, contained no performance concerns until the month after his grievance. His pre-grievance appraisals were consistently positive.

The tribunal finds race discrimination proved and assesses injury to feelings in the middle Vento band —

. It then considers whether the way the employer conducted itself in the proceedings warrants aggravated damages. The tribunal finds it does: the fabrication of a performance narrative during litigation, and the decision to put the HR director in the witness box to defend it, significantly added to Marcus

s distress during a year of proceedings.

Injury to feelings (middle Vento band)

Aggravated damages (litigation conduct)

Total non-financial loss

The tribunal is careful to avoid double-counting. The aggravating conduct — the false narrative constructed in litigation — is distinct from the original discriminatory act. It did not already inflate the injury to feelings figure. The additional £4,000 represents the further distress caused by spending a year being told, officially, that you were dismissed for a reason the tribunal has found to be invented.

Common pitfalls for claimants

• Not pleading aggravated damages.
• Tribunals will not routinely award them if you have not asked. Include a specific request in your ET1 or remedy schedule, and identify the conduct you rely on. A general complaint about the employer
• s behaviour is not enough.
• Conflating aggravated with exemplary damages.
• Exemplary damages are not available in employment tribunal. If you want additional compensation because of how badly the employer behaved, the route is aggravated damages — still compensatory, not punitive.
• If conduct was already considered in fixing the injury to feelings award at the upper end of a band, you cannot then rely on the same conduct for aggravated damages. Identify fresh aggravating conduct — typically litigation behaviour — rather than recycling what drove the feelings award upward.
• Assuming a hostile defence automatically triggers an award.
• Employers are entitled to defend cases vigorously and challenge evidence. What crosses the line is conduct designed to make the proceedings more distressing for the claimant — fabricated evidence, deliberate delays, witness evidence the tribunal finds knowingly untrue.
• Treating aggravated damages as a primary remedy.
• They are a supplementary element in a discrimination claim. The central task is proving discrimination. Aggravated damages follow if the circumstances warrant them.

Frequently asked questions

Sources & further reading

• Equality Act 2010, s.124
• — tribunal remedies (legislation.gov.uk)
• Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Shaw
• [2012] ICR 464 — EAT on criteria for aggravated damages
• Vento v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police [2002] EWCA Civ 1871
• — injury to feelings bands (BAILII)
• Your rights under the Equality Act 2010

Building a discrimination claim?

Start My Claim helps you identify what happened, structure your evidence, and draft your schedule of loss — including any aggravated damages argument.

Last reviewed: June 2026.

Statutory references checked against the Equality Act 2010 as in force on 8 June 2026. Vento band figures updated for 2026 per Presidential Guidance.

This page is explanatory only and is not legal advice. Start My Claim is self-service software, not a law firm — its tools help you build and run your own case.