Injury to Feelings Awards: The 2026 Vento Bands and What They Mean for Employers

When an employment tribunal finds that an employer has discriminated against someone, compensation isn't limited to financial loss, i.e. pay. Claimants can also be awarded damages for "injury to feelings," compensation for the hurt, distress and anxiety caused by the act (or acts) of discrimination itself, separate from any financial loss. For employers, understanding how these awards are calculated and how large they can become, is an important part of assessing the real risk behind a discrimination claim.

What Is an Injury to Feelings Award?

Unlike unfair dismissal compensation (until January 2027), there is no statutory cap on discrimination awards under the Equality Act 2010. Alongside financial losses like lost earnings a tribunal can award a separate sum for injury to feelings, intended purely to compensate the claimant, not to punish the employer. Tribunals will look at factors including the seriousness of the treatment, the claimant's personal characteristics and vulnerability, any medical evidence, the effect on their career and how the employer handled any related grievance.

The 2026 Vento Bands for Injury to Feelings

Injury to feelings awards are assessed using guideline bands set out in Vento v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police (No.2), and updated annually by Presidential Guidance to reflect inflation. The Ninth Addendum, issued in March 2026, sets the following bands for claims presented on or after 6 April 2026:

• Lower band: £1,300 to £12,600 for less serious cases, such as an isolated or one-off act of discrimination.

• Middle band: £12,600 to £37,700 for serious cases that don't merit an award in the upper band, including repeated or sustained discriminatory treatment.

• Upper band: £37,700 to £62,900 for the most serious cases, such as prolonged or particularly serious discriminatory conduct.

In the most exceptional cases, an award can exceed the top of the upper band entirely.

A Real Example: Dismissal Following Disability-Related Absence

The importance of getting absence and performance management right for disabled employees was starkly illustrated in Wright-Turner v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham and Dero. The claimant, a senior council director, was diagnosed with ADHD and later developed PTSD linked to her role. After being signed off work with acute anxiety and PTSD, her probationary period was extended by three months while she remained off sick, and she was ultimately dismissed after failing to improve her performance while on long-term sick leave.

The tribunal found both the probation extension and the dismissal to be discriminatory. Critically, it held that but for her disability-related sickness absence, the claimant would have passed her probation and been confirmed in post. A hypothetical non-disabled comparator, facing the same lack of evidenced performance concerns and the same lack of a fair process, would not have been dismissed.

At the remedies hearing, the tribunal made a discrimination arising from disability injury to feelings award of £60,000, which exceeded the top of the applicable Vento band at the time, alongside a further £60,000 for psychiatric injury, substantial past and future loss of earnings, pension loss, and an uplift for failure to comply with the Acas Code of Practice. The total award came to just over £4.58 million, one of the largest employment tribunal awards ever made.

Why This Matters for Employers

This case is an extreme example, but the underlying lesson applies far more widely. Dismissing, or taking action short of dismissal, because of disability-related absence, without a properly evidenced process, clear reasons and a genuine opportunity for the employee to respond, creates real discrimination risk. Where a tribunal finds that a hypothetical non-disabled comparator would not have faced the same outcome, both liability and the resulting injury to feelings award can follow quickly.

What Employers Should Do

Handle disability-related absence carefully. Before taking any formal action linked to sickness absence, consider whether the absence relates to a disability, obtain occupational health input where appropriate, and think through whether reasonable adjustments could avoid the need for action altogether.

Follow a fair, evidenced process. Give clear reasons, allow the employee to respond, and don't rely on vague or incomplete explanations in dismissal or disciplinary letters. Poor process is often what turns a difficult decision into a discrimination finding.

Take grievances and appeals seriously. Failing to respond properly to a grievance or appeal, particularly one raising discrimination concerns, can itself increase tribunal exposure through an Acas Code uplift.

Get advice early. Where disability and performance or absence issues intersect, the risk of getting it wrong is significant, and the potential cost, as this case shows, can be severe.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are the current Vento bands? For claims presented on or after 6 April 2026, the bands are: lower £1,300 to £12,600, middle £12,600 to £37,700, and upper £37,700 to £62,900, with the most exceptional cases capable of exceeding £62,900.

Is there a cap on discrimination compensation? No. Unlike unfair dismissal, there is no statutory cap on compensation under the Equality Act 2010, including for injury to feelings, financial loss, and psychiatric injury.

Can dismissing someone for disability-related sickness absence amount to discrimination? It can, particularly where the employer cannot show a fair, evidenced process and the dismissal is linked to the disability-related absence itself, rather than to genuine, properly evidenced performance or capability concerns unrelated to that absence. Get your ducks in a row to provide evidence at a later date.

IMPACT

Injury to feelings awards are a real and growing area of financial exposure for employers given the level of discrimination claims and the 2026 Vento bands confirm that tribunals will continue to be guided by inflation-adjusted, sometimes substantial, figures. Cases like Wright-Turner v Hammersmith and Fulham are a powerful reminder that disability related absence management needs careful handling, proper process and early legal advice, well before a decision to dismiss is made.

Contact Oliver Tasker to chat through any implications for your business:

📞 Call: 01522 776270 ✉️ Email: oliver@impactemploymentlaw.co.uk

Impact Employment Law Limited — Advice. Protection. Impact.