Case 2406659/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Kira Greenwood v J D Wetherspoon plc — 2026
- Case reference
- 2406659/2024
- Decision date
- 11 February 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Greer
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Kira Greenwood
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment concerned the respondent's application to strike out the remaining wrongful dismissal claim. The claimant had previously withdrawn her unfair dismissal claim, leaving only the contractual question of whether the respondent was entitled to dismiss without notice.
The tribunal found that, on the claimant's own case, she was absent from work from 20 July 2024 to 30 September 2024, had not provided a fit note or other medical certification when requested, and had not been granted leave. Taking the claimant's allegations of bullying and anxiety at their highest, the tribunal concluded that the pleaded case did not identify a contractual basis on which dismissal without notice could be shown to be a breach of contract.
The tribunal held that the wrongful dismissal claim had no reasonable prospect of success and exercised its discretion to strike it out under Rule 38(1)(a). No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | The wrongful dismissal claim was struck out under Employment Tribunal Rule 38(1)(a) because it had no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claimant withdrew her unfair dismissal claim on 29 January 2025. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Employment Tribunal Rule 38(1)(a)
- Employment Tribunal Rule 38(2)
- Cox v Adecco Group UK & Ireland
- two-stage test for strike out
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.