The Claimant was dismissed for gross misconduct relating to threatening behaviour. The overall conclusion as expressed in his ET1 was that losing his job was "disproportionate unfair dismissal", saying that people at work had made much worse comments than he had. The ET found that his dismissal was fair. The Claimant appealed on the grounds that the ET had not dealt with the Claimant's argument that the Respondent had dealt with his case and with that of a woman employee inconsistently.

The EAT allowed the appeal, holding that the argument had been raised in the Claimant's ET1, and at the ET hearing. The EAT further held that it was not enough for the ET to summarise, in its judgment, the Respondent's submissions about the disparity argument. The ET should, in addition, have made factual findings about the Claimant's case on disparity and then explained how, if at all, those findings affected its analysis of the unfair dismissal claim.