Asda Stores Ltd v Raymond UKEAT/0268/17/DA & UKEAT/0269/17/DA
Appeal by the Respondent against the ET’s finding that the Claimant’s dismissal was unfair and arose from his disability, and against an order for reinstatement. Appeal dismissed.
The Claimant, a lorry driver for the Respondent, was summarily dismissed when the Respondent received information that the Claimant had been seen urinating in a loading yard. The Claimant suffered from diabetes and had urgently needed to urinate; the Respondent asserted that the Claimant had urinated on pallets, but the CCTV evidence on this was unclear. The ET found that the Respondent had not taken the Claimant's disability into account; and, at the request of the Claimant, who had apologised for the incident, ordered reinstatement.
The EAT held that the ET was entitled to conclude that the evidence did not establish that the Claimant had urinated on the pallets. On reinstatement, the ET had considered the particular circumstances of the Claimant and found that the operative cause of the dismissal was his disability, and correctly concluded that trust and confidence could be restored.
Published: 10/01/2019 13:05