Case 1805465/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J E Yorke v Samuel Smiths Old Brewery (Tadcaster) — 2022
- Case reference
- 1805465/2021
- Decision date
- 28 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Shore NLM
- Venue
- Leeds
- Panel members
- Ms J Lancaster, Mr K Lannaman
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss J E Yorke
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Leeds on 20, 21 and 22 July 2022, before Employment Judge S Shore with Ms J Lancaster and Mr K Lannaman, the tribunal unanimously found that Miss J E Yorke had been constructively unfairly dismissed by Samuel Smiths Old Brewery (Tadcaster). It also upheld her wrongful dismissal claim for failure to pay notice pay. The judgment recorded that there should be no deduction from compensation arising from contributory conduct or Polkey.
The tribunal dismissed the claims of direct disability discrimination under section 13 Equality Act 2010, failure to make reasonable adjustments under sections 20 and 21, harassment related to disability under section 26, and victimisation under section 27. On the discrimination issues, the tribunal therefore rejected the claimant's case in full.
The tribunal further found that the respondent had breached its duty to provide a written statement of employment particulars or of changes to those particulars, and recorded that there were no exceptional circumstances making the minimum section 38 Employment Act 2002 award unjust or inequitable. The extracted text does not state the cash amount of that award. It also records that terms of settlement on remedy had been agreed and met, and that the case would be dismissed upon withdrawal on 18 August 2022 unless either party sought relisting by 4:00pm on that date.
Claims and outcomes
7 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Constructive unfair dismissal succeeded; the tribunal also recorded that there should be no deduction from compensation for contributory conduct or Polkey. | Upheld | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Wrongful dismissal succeeded in respect of failure to pay notice pay. | Upheld | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Direct discrimination claim under section 13 Equality Act 2010 failed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments under sections 20 and 21 Equality Act 2010 failed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | Harassment related to disability under section 26 Equality Act 2010 failed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | Victimisation under section 27 Equality Act 2010 failed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Other | Breach of duty to provide a written statement of employment particulars or of a change to those particulars; the tribunal recorded no exceptional circumstances making the minimum section 38 Employment Act 2002 award unjust or inequitable, but the extracted text does not state the cash figure. |
Legal tests applied
8 references- section 13 Equality Act 2010
- sections 20 and 21 Equality Act 2010
- section 26 Equality Act 2010
- section 27 Equality Act 2010
- section 1 ERA 1996
- section 38 Employment Act 2002
- contributory conduct
- Polkey
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.