Case 1303700/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Aldi Stores Ltd and P Seddon — 2021
- Case reference
- 1303700/2019
- Decision date
- 19 April 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shotter
- Panel members
- Ms F Crane, Ms P Owen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal unanimously dismissed the claimant’s direct discrimination claim under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010. It found that he was not treated less favourably because of his protected characteristic of sexual orientation by either respondent.
The tribunal also dismissed the harassment claim under section 26 of the Equality Act 2010. It found that the first and second respondents did not engage in unwanted conduct related to the claimant’s sexual orientation.
By contrast, the tribunal upheld the claimant’s constructive unfair dismissal claim against the first respondent. It found that the first respondent had breached the implied term of trust and confidence, that the breach was sufficiently serious to amount to a fundamental breach, that the claimant did not affirm the contract, and that he resigned as a result of that breach.
Liability was decided at this hearing and the constructive unfair dismissal claim was adjourned to a remedy hearing listed for 5 November 2021, with the parties’ agreement. No monetary award is recorded in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sexual orientation discrimination | Direct discrimination claim under section 13 Equality Act 2010 against both respondents was dismissed. | Dismissed | Sexual orientation | — |
| Harassment | Harassment claim under section 26 Equality Act 2010 against both respondents was dismissed. | Dismissed | Sexual orientation | — |
| Constructive dismissal | The tribunal found the first respondent breached the implied term of trust and confidence, that the breach was a fundamental breach, that the claimant did not affirm the contract, and that he resigned in response. Liability was found and the matter was adjourned to a remedy hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.