Case 1600899/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs G Williams v Wilko Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 1600899/2022
- Decision date
- 19 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Leith Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs G Williams
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs G Williams, a Team Supervisor at Wilko's Barry store, was dismissed after an investigation into smoking on company property, break-taking and compliance with the back door access log. She accepted that she had smoked on the respondent's premises and had not signed the access control sheet each time she used the back door. She said that a shorter-break arrangement had been agreed with Mrs Parry because of menopausal symptoms, and the tribunal accepted that evidence, finding that an informal adjustment allowing her to split breaks had been made.
The tribunal accepted that the respondent genuinely believed misconduct had occurred and that the investigation and appeal process were broadly fair. It held, however, that dismissal was outside the range of reasonable responses when the evidence showed a wider culture of smoking in the yard or goods-in area that was not challenged by managers, the back door was treated as a 'free for all', and the claimant had over 16 years' unblemished service. The unfair dismissal complaint therefore succeeded. The tribunal made no Polkey reduction, but reduced both the basic award and compensatory award by 50% for contributory conduct.
The wrongful dismissal claim failed. The tribunal held that smoking on the respondent's premises amounted to gross misconduct under the disciplinary policy, so the claimant was not entitled to notice pay and the breach of contract/wrongful dismissal complaint was dismissed. This decision was on liability only, and the unfair dismissal remedy was left to a later hearing.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Liability only. The tribunal held the dismissal was unfair, found no Polkey reduction, and said the basic and compensatory awards would be reduced by 50% for contributory conduct at remedy. | Upheld | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Dismissed because the claimant's smoking on the respondent's premises was treated as gross misconduct under the disciplinary policy, so summary dismissal without notice was justified. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
13 references- s.98(4) ERA 1996
- Burchell v British Home Stores
- Post Office v Foley
- Iceland Frozen Foods Ltd v Jones
- Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd v Hitt
- London Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Small
- Polkey v AE Dayton Services Ltd
- Software 2000 Ltd v Andrews
- W Devis & Sons Ltd v Atkins
- Crédit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank v Wardle
- Hill v Governing Body of Great Tey Primary School
- s.122(2) ERA 1996
- s.123(6) ERA 1996
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.