Case 2403706/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Asda Stores Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 2403706/2023
- Decision date
- 4 April 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Kenward
- Venue
- Manchester
- Panel members
- Mr D Mockford, Mr I Taylor
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal dismissed the claimant's complaint of unfair constructive dismissal under sections 95(1)(c), 98 and 111 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, finding that it was not well-founded.
The Tribunal also dismissed the complaint of unfair dismissal by reason of having made a protected disclosure under sections 103A and 111 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and dismissed the complaint of detriment by reason of having made a protected disclosure under section 47B.
The claimant's Equality Act 2010 section 27 victimisation complaint was also dismissed as not well-founded. The written judgment records the outcomes only; reasons were given orally and no remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment describes this as a complaint of unfair (constructive) dismissal contrary to Employment Rights Act 1996 sections 95(1)(c), 98 and 111. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The judgment describes this as a complaint of unfair dismissal by reason of having made a protected disclosure contrary to Employment Rights Act 1996 sections 103A and 111. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The judgment describes this as a complaint of victimisation by being subjected to detriment by reason of having made a protected disclosure contrary to Employment Rights Act 1996 section 47B. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Victimisation | The judgment describes this as a complaint of victimisation contrary to Equality Act 2010 section 27. The protected characteristic, if any, is not identified in the judgment text. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Employment Rights Act 1996 sections 95(1)(c), 98 and 111
- Employment Rights Act 1996 sections 103A and 111
- Employment Rights Act 1996 section 47B
- Equality Act 2010 section 27
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.