Case 2301851/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Tracey v Asda Stores Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2301851/2021
- Decision date
- 11 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T Perry Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Tracey
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant was dismissed after the Respondent concluded that he had taken and consumed cheese and bacon bites from a customer's order and left the packet and other litter near the customer's property. The Tribunal found that the Respondent's reason for dismissal was its belief in the alleged misconduct, which was a conduct reason under section 98 ERA 1996.
For unfair dismissal, the Tribunal held that there were reasonable grounds for the Respondent's belief. It considered the photographs, the Claimant's receipt and salad, his delivery route and break location, and the reported missing item from an earlier delivery. The Tribunal also found that the Respondent's investigation, including its consideration of the Claimant's allegation that a colleague had set him up, was objectively reasonable overall, although the failure to check van CCTV caused concern.
The Tribunal concluded that the disciplinary process was fair overall and in accordance with the ACAS Code, and that dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses. On wrongful dismissal, the Tribunal found on the balance of probabilities that the Claimant committed the misconduct alleged, that this amounted to retail theft and gross misconduct under the Respondent's policies, and that dismissal without notice was therefore not wrongful.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The Tribunal found the reason for dismissal was conduct, that the Respondent had reasonable grounds after a reasonable investigation, and that dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment refers to breach of contract in the judgment section and wrongful dismissal in the reasons; the pleaded issue was dismissal without notice. The Tribunal found the Respondent proved gross misconduct on the balance of probabilities, so dismissal without notice was not wrongful. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed on withdrawal at the start of the hearing. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
11 references- section 98 ERA 1996
- s.98(4) ERA 1996
- British Homes Stores v Burchell
- band of reasonable responses
- Iceland Frozen Foods Ltd v Jones
- Taylor v OCS Group Ltd
- Sainsbury's Supermarket Ltd v Hitt
- Shrestha v Genesis Housing Association Ltd
- Polkey v A E Dayton Services Limited
- Nelson v BBC
- balance of probabilities
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.