Case 2304206/2018 · Employment Tribunal

Mr M Sprack, Counsel For the v Respondent — 2019

Case reference: 2304206/2018
Decision date: 28 November 2019
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Hyde Dated

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

1 named

Claimant

Mr M Sprack, Counsel For the

Respondent

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal, sitting alone at London South before Employment Judge C Hyde, held that Mr A Yasothararajah was wrongfully dismissed by Tesco Stores Limited and was entitled to damages equivalent to his notice period. It also held that he had been unfairly dismissed under section 98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.

For the unfair dismissal remedy, the tribunal recorded that there should be no reduction under Polkey. It further held under section 207A(2) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 that it was just and equitable to increase the award by 15%.

The tribunal also found that the claimant had contributed to the termination of his employment by his admitted conduct of taking unauthorised absence between 23 June and 7 July 2018, and reduced the unfair dismissal award by 20% on that basis. The parties agreed an interim payment of £3,137.40 net to be paid on account of the final award, whether in respect of wrongful dismissal damages, unfair dismissal compensation, or arrears of pay if a re-employment order were made.

The remedy hearing was listed for 3 March 2020, and the claimant confirmed that he wished to be re-employed. Directions were made for disclosure, a schedule of loss, bundle preparation, exchange of witness statements, and the provision of a Tamil (Sri Lanka) interpreter.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Wrongful dismissal	The tribunal held the claimant was wrongfully dismissed and was entitled to damages equivalent to payment for his notice period. The judgment did not quantify the amount because remedy was to be determined at a later hearing.	Upheld	—	—
Unfair dismissal	The tribunal found unfair dismissal under section 98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. On remedy it recorded no Polkey deduction, a 15% uplift under section 207A(2) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, and a 20% reduction for the claimant's admitted unauthorised absence between 23 June and 7 July 2018. Final quantum was deferred to the remedy hearing.	Upheld	—	—

Legal tests applied

3 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.