The judge said the "very modest" damages due to Mr Smith was the very small difference between his contractual salary and the amount actually paid to him during the 12 weeks following his assumption of his new, but reduced, role.
I must admit to real disquiet about the financial outcome of this case.
Mr Smith was taken to task for doing nothing wrong, suspended and subjected to a disciplinary procedure which wrongly found him guilty of gross misconduct, and then demoted to a non-managerial post with an eventual 40% reduction in salary.
The breach of contract which the trust thereby committed was serious and repudiatory.
A conclusion that his damages are limited to less than £100 leaves the uncomfortable feeling that justice has not been done to him in the circumstances.
More top news
Could the Internet hold the key to easing the burden on our overstretched health service? Dr Oscar Duke reports for Tonight.
An agreement that Syria's Idlib province should be a safe haven is being ignored by its own government, writes John Irvine.
Clear, crisp & freezing cold with fresh falls of snow