Claimant v Shepherd Neame
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal heard the case over two days and determined that the claimant's claim of unfair dismissal failed. The judgment dismissed the claim, indicating the tribunal found the dismissal to be fair or that the claimant failed to establish the elements required for a finding of unfair dismissal.
Facts
William Hill brought a claim of unfair dismissal against his former employer Shepherd Neame, a company in the hospitality sector. The case was heard over two days by video hearing at London South Employment Tribunal. The claimant was represented by a lay representative while the respondent was represented by counsel.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's unfair dismissal claim after a two-day hearing. The tribunal found that the claim failed, meaning either the dismissal was fair or the claimant did not establish the necessary elements for unfair dismissal.
Practical note
The judgment provides no reasoned explanation, highlighting the importance of obtaining full written reasons to understand the tribunal's decision-making process in unfair dismissal cases.
Case details
- Case number
- 2309601/2024
- Decision date
- 11 November 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Name
- Shepherd Neame
- Sector
- hospitality
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep