Case 1804177/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Smith v WM Morrisons Supermarkets plc AT A HEARING — 2024
- Case reference
- 1804177/2021
- Decision date
- 17 May 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lancaster Members
- Venue
- Leeds
- Panel members
- T Downes, G Corbett
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K Smith
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was summarily dismissed for gross misconduct after an investigation into allegations concerning messages to female colleagues, an undeclared relationship with a subordinate, and loss of trust and confidence. The tribunal found that the respondent dismissed for conduct, that the decision-maker had a genuine belief based on substantial grounds, and that the investigation was thorough. Although the tribunal considered that the disciplinary hearing should on balance have been adjourned to consider the ill-health postponement request, it found that this did not make the dismissal unfair and that dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses.
The respondent conceded that the claimant was disabled by depression and anxiety from September 2020 and had knowledge from 15 December 2020. The tribunal dismissed the disability discrimination claims, finding that the claimant had not shown that his conduct arose in consequence of disability, that the refusal of legal representation and further postponement was not unfavourable treatment because of something arising from disability, and that the pleaded PCP for reasonable adjustments was not established.
By consent, the tribunal declared an unauthorised deduction from wages for the non-payment of salary for the final week of employment, including any additional accrued holiday entitlement. It dismissed all other claims, including the remaining monetary complaints about holiday entitlement up to 14 May 2021, SSP, bonus and Long Term Incentive Plan payments.
Claims and outcomes
6 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 tribunal found the claimant was dismissed for conduct, the decision-maker genuinely believed he had committed the misconduct, there were substantial grounds after a thorough investigation, and dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination arising from disability under section 15 Equality Act 2010 was dismissed. The tribunal found no medical evidence that the claimant's contact with female colleagues arose in consequence of disability and found that, in any event, the investigation and dismissal were justified. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Failure to make reasonable adjustments was dismissed. The tribunal found the pleaded PCP was not established and that the respondent had taken disability into account after acquiring knowledge of disability. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | By consent, the tribunal declared that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from wages for non-payment of salary for the final week of employment from 14 to 20 May 2021. The judgment did not state an amount. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The consent declaration for the final week of employment included an amount for any additional accrued holiday entitlement. The tribunal separately found that the claimant had received all due holiday entitlement up to 14 May 2021. The judgment did not state an amount. |
Legal tests applied
8 references- paragraph 2 of Schedule 2 to the Equality Act 2010
- Guidance on the Definition of Disability (2011) Section C
- section 98(4) Employment Rights Act 1996
- ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures
- Taylor v OCS Group [2006] EWCA Civ 702
- section 15 Equality Act 2010
- sections 20 and 21 Equality Act 2010
- section 123 Equality Act 2010
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.