What a tribunal can order when an AI decision at work was discriminatory in Great Britain

If an employment tribunal finds that an automated screen, score or ranking was used in a way that discriminated, what happens next is set out in section 124 of the Equality Act 2010. The tribunal has three main tools: a declaration, compensation and a recommendation. One of them, the recommendation, can reach the tool itself.

The short answer: where a tribunal finds a contravention of the Act's work provisions, it may declare the parties' rights, order the employer to pay compensation, and make an appropriate recommendation (s124(1)-(2)). Compensation can include an amount for injured feelings (s119(4); s124(6)).

The three remedies

• Declaration: a statement of the rights of the complainant and the employer in relation to the matters in the claim (s124(2)(a)).
• Compensation: the amount corresponds to what the county court or the sheriff could award under section 119 (s124(6)). An award of damages may include compensation for injured feelings, whether or not it includes compensation on any other basis (s119(4)).
• Appropriate recommendation: that within a specified period the employer takes specified steps to obviate or reduce the adverse effect on the complainant of any matter in the proceedings (s124(3)). The steps are for the complainant's benefit, as the subsection is worded.

Indirect discrimination that was not intended

Many AI cases are about a model or rule that was applied to everyone and turned out to disadvantage a group, without anyone meaning it to; see indirect discrimination. Where the tribunal finds indirect discrimination under section 19 or 19A but is satisfied the provision, criterion or practice was not applied with the intention of discriminating against the complainant, it must not order compensation unless it first considers whether to make a declaration or a recommendation (s124(4)-(5)). That is an order of thinking, not a bar on compensation.

Ignoring a recommendation

If the employer fails, without reasonable excuse, to comply with an appropriate recommendation, the tribunal may increase the compensation it ordered, or order compensation if it had not done so (s124(7)).

Sexual harassment and the duty to prevent it

Where the tribunal finds harassment of an employee that involved sexual harassment and orders compensation, it must consider whether the employer also breached its duty to take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment. If so, it may add a compensation uplift of up to 25% (s124A). See the duty to prevent sexual harassment.

How this can play out with AI tools

• Recommendations about the process: a recommendation can name specific steps for the complainant, which in an AI case could involve reconsidering an application or a score by a person, or adjusting how a test is taken.
• Evidence of what was intended: for indirect discrimination, records showing why a tool was chosen, how it was checked and what was done when problems appeared can be relevant to whether the practice was applied with the intention of discriminating.
• Vendor contracts: section 124 provides for orders against the respondent to the claim. Whether an employer can recover anything from a vendor is not covered by section 124 and depends on their contract.

For when a claim must be made and who has to prove what, see time limits and the burden of proof. For the wider rules, see AI and the Equality Act 2010.

This page covers Great Britain and is general information on the law as at 2 November 2026, not legal advice.