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
Who will get hired and who will get fired by Lord Sugar in this year's Apprentice?
Instagram is celebrating its fifth birthday just weeks after smashing the 400-million-user mark.
European judges have found French restrictions on prisoners' voting rights are legal, a decision likely to be welcomed in Britain.