Mr S O’Brien v Tesco Stores Ltd — 2019

Case reference: 2410057/2019
Decision date: 3 December 2019
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Ross REPRESENTATION
Venue: Manchester

Indexed: 19 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr S O’Brien

Respondent

Tesco Stores Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The Tribunal amended the respondent's name to Tesco Stores Limited.

The Tribunal found that the claimant was unfairly, constructively dismissed. It also found that, applying the principle in Polkey v A E Dayton Services Limited, it was inevitable the claimant would have been dismissed for gross misconduct within eight weeks of his resignation.

The Tribunal reduced both the basic award and compensatory award by 100% for culpable and blameworthy conduct. Accordingly, no compensation was awarded.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Constructive dismissal	The judgment states the claimant was unfairly (constructively) dismissed, but that Polkey meant dismissal for gross misconduct within eight weeks was inevitable and both basic and compensatory awards were reduced by 100% for culpable and blameworthy conduct.	Upheld	—	£0

Remedy

Monetary award

Total award: £0; across all upheld claims
Basic award: £0; statutory, unfair dismissal
Compensatory award: £0; compensatory remedy recorded

Legal tests applied

1 reference

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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.