Case 1403417/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Addis in person For the v Respondent — 2020
- Case reference
- 1403417/2018
- Decision date
- 13 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Midgley
- Venue
- Bristol
- Panel members
- Mrs L Simmonds, Mr C Williams
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr M Addis in person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Midgley, Mrs L Simmonds and Mr C Williams, the tribunal held that Mr Addis's unfair dismissal claim against Asda Stores Ltd was well founded and succeeded. It also found that the claimant would have been fairly dismissed on grounds of capability on 31 July 2019 if the respondent had adopted a fair process.
The tribunal upheld the claim that the claimant's dismissal was discrimination arising from disability. It found that the dismissal was unfavourable treatment and that it was caused by the claimant's sickness absence and inability to work with his managers, both of which arose from his disability. The tribunal found that the decision was not justified because the method adopted to secure the legitimate aim was not proportionate and was itself tainted by discrimination.
The claims of direct discrimination, indirect discrimination and victimisation were dismissed as not well founded. Remedy was not determined in this judgment: the hearing of the claimant's claims for compensation was adjourned to 6 March 2020 at the Bristol Employment Tribunal, with directions set in a separate order.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The unfair dismissal claim was well founded and succeeded. The tribunal also found the claimant would have been fairly dismissed on grounds of capability on 31 July 2019 had the respondent adopted a fair process. | Upheld | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The claim that dismissal was discrimination arising from disability was well founded and succeeded. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The direct discrimination and indirect discrimination claims were not well founded and were dismissed. The short judgment does not separately identify further particulars of those claims. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | The victimisation claim was not well founded and was dismissed. The short judgment does not separately identify further particulars of that claim. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
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.