Claimant v Sainsbury's Supermarket Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the claimant's claim of unfair dismissal was not well-founded. The reasons were given orally at the hearing but not recorded in this judgment summary.
The tribunal determined the claimant's wrongful dismissal claim was not well founded. The specific reasoning was provided orally at the hearing.
The tribunal concluded the claimant's harassment claim on the grounds of age was not well founded. The detailed reasons were given orally at the hearing.
Facts
Mr Yeboah brought claims against Sainsbury's Supermarket Limited for unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, and harassment on the grounds of age. The case was heard over two days at Watford Employment Tribunal. The claimant was represented by a paralegal while the respondent was represented by counsel. Specific factual details were not recorded in this judgment summary as reasons were given orally.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed all three of the claimant's claims, finding none were well-founded. The tribunal heard evidence and submissions over two days before reaching its decision. Detailed reasons for the dismissal of each claim were provided orally at the hearing.
Practical note
This case demonstrates that age harassment claims alongside dismissal claims require sufficient evidence to succeed, and oral reasons at hearings are not always transcribed into written judgments unless specifically requested.
Case details
- Case number
- 3305415/2024
- Decision date
- 15 October 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- retail
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep