Mr S Jackman v John Lewis plc — 2026

Mr S Jackman was employed by John Lewis plc as an LGV1 night shift driver from 15 November 2021 until his summary dismissal on 5 March 2025. The only complaint before the tribunal was unfair dismissal. The respondent relied on conduct, saying that the claimant had deliberately wasted time during the night shift on 7/8 February 2025 and that this amounted to work avoidance under its disciplinary policy.

The tribunal found that the dismissing manager, Mr Digney, genuinely believed that the claimant had committed misconduct. It rejected the claimant's appeal suggestion that managers wanted to remove him because of a change of shift pattern after sick leave, finding no evidence that this played any part in Mr Digney's decision. The tribunal found that the decision was based on what Mr Digney decided had happened on 7/8 February 2025.

Applying section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and the misconduct approach in British Home Stores Ltd v Burchell, the tribunal found that there were reasonable grounds for the respondent's belief, based on statements, CCTV, schedules and Microlise records. It found the investigation reasonable, including two investigation meetings, witness statements, review of CCTV and time records, and separate handling of the claimant's complaint about a manager. It also found that a fair procedure was adopted overall, with investigation, disciplinary and appeal hearings handled by different managers and meaningful opportunities for the claimant to respond.

On sanction, the tribunal found that dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses. It noted the respondent's belief that there was no adequate explanation for the period spent in the de-kit area, the express inclusion of work avoidance as conduct liable to result in dismissal without notice, the August 2024 informal conversation about accurate timekeeping, and the importance of scheduling, timekeeping and trust in drivers recording their own work and breaks. The complaint of unfair dismissal was dismissed and no remedy was awarded.