Mr D Thomas v Rolls Royce plc (England and Wales : Unfair Dismissal) [2023] UKET 2602062/2022 (17 March 2023)

The tribunal determined whether the dismissal was fair in all the circumstances in accordance with section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: [2023] UKET 2602062/2022
Parties: Claimant: Mr D Thomas; Respondent: Rolls Royce plc
Jurisdiction: United Kingdom
Judgment Date: 17 March 2023
Procedural Posture: Employment Tribunal / Judgment
Outcome: Judgment for the respondent
Legal Topics: Unfair Dismissal

Employment Law Unfair Dismissal

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2

Parties

Mr D Thomas

Claimant

Rolls Royce plc

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Tribunal / Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed by the respondent

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal determined whether the dismissal was fair in all the circumstances in accordance with section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the respondent

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.