Case 2304355/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Ms D McElvaney-Bryson v Iceland Foods Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2304355/2018
- Decision date
- 23 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ferguson Members
- Venue
- London South
- Panel members
- Ms T Bryant, Ms S Khawaja
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms D McElvaney-Bryson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant was employed as a sales assistant/cashier and was dismissed after an incident in which she took water before a shift, tried to pay with an Iceland Bonus Card that had insufficient funds, and arranged for the transaction to be processed with the intention of paying back £1 later. The Tribunal found that she deliberately breached the employee purchase procedure, but that the Respondent did not have reasonable grounds to conclude that she had acted dishonestly or committed theft.
The Tribunal held that dismissal fell outside the range of reasonable responses. It took account of the small sum involved, the finding that the Claimant intended to pay it back, her length of service, the context of her usual permission to buy water before shifts, and the fact that she apologised and said it would not happen again. The dismissal was also procedurally unfair because the Respondent failed to give advance written notice of the allegations and evidence, failed to allow reasonable preparation time, and effectively denied the right to be accompanied.
For disability discrimination, the Respondent accepted that the Claimant's dyslexia was a disability and that it had constructive knowledge. The Tribunal found that taking at face value employees' wishes not to be accompanied at disciplinary hearings put the Claimant at a substantial disadvantage because she could not read or write. Reasonable adjustments required ensuring that she understood the purpose of the hearing and right to be accompanied, and adjourning the hearing so she could consider the matter and arrange support. The wrongful dismissal claim also succeeded because the conduct found did not amount to a repudiatory breach of contract.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The upheld disability discrimination complaint was failure to make reasonable adjustments. Remedy was reserved to a separate hearing. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The Tribunal found the dismissal unfair and directed that the basic and compensatory awards be reduced by 30% for contributory fault. The compensatory award was also to be increased under s.207A TULR(C)A, with the percentage to be determined at the remedy hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The Tribunal found that the Claimant's conduct was not a repudiatory breach entitling the Respondent to dismiss without notice. Remedy was reserved to a separate hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
10 references- s.98 Employment Rights Act 1996
- British Home Stores Ltd v Burchell
- range of reasonable responses
- Iceland Frozen Foods Ltd v Jones
- ss.122-123 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.207A Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- ACAS Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures
- s.20 Equality Act 2010
- s.21 Equality Act 2010
- paragraph 20 of Schedule 8 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.