Case 6000922/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. C Mead v Asda Stores Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6000922/2025
- Decision date
- 25 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cawthray Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. C Mead
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dismissed all claims. It found that the complaints of unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal were not well-founded.
The tribunal also dismissed the complaints of direct sex discrimination and harassment related to sex, finding that each was not well-founded. Written reasons were not included in the judgment because reasons had been given orally at the hearing, with written reasons available only if requested under the stated procedure.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states the complaint of unfair dismissal was not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment states the complaint of wrongful dismissal was not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | The judgment states the complaint of direct sex discrimination was not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Harassment | The judgment states the complaint of harassment related to sex was not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.