Case 6001739/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Jacob Neat v J D Weatherspoon plc — 2025
- Case reference
- 6001739/2024
- Decision date
- 26 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Winfield Representation
- Venue
- CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Jacob Neat
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant, a Shift Manager at the Red Lion, Petersfield, was summarily dismissed on 20 February 2024 for gross misconduct after two incidents in which he was found to have incorrectly processed staff discount at 50%. He brought a sole claim of unfair dismissal, which was heard by Employment Judge Winfield sitting alone over two days in April 2025.
Applying the Burchell test and s.98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the Tribunal found that the Respondent held a genuine belief in the misconduct, on reasonable grounds, following a reasonable investigation. The 50% staff discount policy and the consequences of breaching it had been clearly communicated through the Management Action Pack issued to managers, and the alleged conduct fell within the disciplinary policy. The Tribunal considered the Claimant's five years of service and clean disciplinary record but agreed with the Respondent that these did not outweigh the severity of two separate breaches, and rejected the suggestion of inconsistent treatment by reference to the Jason Brown incident, finding the cases were not truly parallel.
The Tribunal concluded that the procedure was fair and in accordance with the ACAS Code of Practice, and that the sanction of dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses open to a reasonable employer. The complaint of unfair dismissal was held not to be well founded and was dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Sole claim of unfair dismissal. Tribunal found the dismissal for gross misconduct (two breaches of the 50% staff discount policy) fell within the band of reasonable responses; the Burchell test was satisfied and the procedure complied with the ACAS Code. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Burchell test
- s.98(2) Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.98(4) Employment Rights Act 1996
- ACAS Code of Practice 1 Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures (2015)
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.