Assistant manager dismissed for using physical force on customers: tribunal upholds John Lewis decision
An assistant team manager with eight years' service was fairly dismissed after CCTV showed him pushing, grabbing and kicking members of the public. The tribunal rejected his claims of disability discrimination and unfair dismissal.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #gross-misconduct
- #physical-assault
- #cctv-evidence
- #migraine-disability
- #ptsd-not-disability
- #reasonable-investigation
- #band-of-reasonable-responses
Key facts
- The claimant was employed by John Lewis from 6 September 2013 until dismissal on 4 February 2022.
- On 7 and 8 November 2021, the claimant used physical force against members of the public, including pushing, grabbing, and kicking.
- The respondent investigated the incidents, reviewed CCTV, and dismissed the claimant for gross misconduct.
- The claimant had migraines (accepted as a disability) but the tribunal found no evidence that his conduct was caused by his disability.
- The tribunal found the respondent had a genuine belief in misconduct, conducted a reasonable investigation, and dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses.
- The claimant's claims for disability discrimination and unfair dismissal were all dismissed.
Timeline
-
Employment started
The claimant began working for John Lewis at the Hall Green branch.
-
Promoted to duty manager
The claimant was promoted to assistant team manager and duty manager.
-
First incident
The claimant responded to a member of the public causing problems; CCTV showed him pushing the person to the ground, grabbing his neck, and kicking him.
-
Second incident
The claimant pushed a shoplifter so hard that the person fell to the floor.
-
Investigation meeting
Mr Bonnell interviewed the claimant; the claimant said he acted in self-defence and did not mention PTSD or loss of control.
-
First disciplinary hearing
The claimant first mentioned PTSD; the hearing was adjourned for further occupational health referral.
-
Dismissal
Mr Smith dismissed the claimant for gross misconduct, concluding the claimant had committed serious breaches of conduct.
-
Appeal lodged
The claimant appealed against his dismissal.
-
Appeal outcome
Mr Towse rejected the appeal, upholding the dismissal.
-
Tribunal hearing concluded
The employment tribunal heard evidence over five days and gave oral judgment dismissing all claims.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed for gross misconduct and whether his dismissal or the respondent's actions amounted to disability discrimination linked to his migraines (accepted as a disability) and PTSD (not accepted as a disability).
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims. It found that the respondent genuinely believed the claimant had committed gross misconduct by using physical force against members of the public on two separate occasions. The investigation was reasonable, including review of CCTV, and the decision to dismiss was within the range of reasonable responses. The tribunal also found no evidence that the claimant's conduct was caused by his disability (migraines) and that his PTSD did not meet the legal definition of disability. No compensation was awarded.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers can fairly dismiss for gross misconduct if they carry out a reasonable investigation and genuinely believe the employee committed the act, even if the employee disputes it.
- Claiming a disability does not automatically protect conduct – there must be a clear link between the disability and the behaviour to succeed in a discrimination claim.
- Physical force against customers or members of the public is likely to be viewed as gross misconduct, particularly when captured on CCTV.
- An employee who represents themselves at tribunal faces a high burden in challenging a well-prepared employer's case.
What this case shows in practice
This case illustrates how an employer can safely dismiss an employee for misconduct even when the employee has a long service record and a recognised disability. The claimant, an assistant team manager and duty manager at John Lewis, used physical force against members of the public on two consecutive days in November 2021. CCTV footage showed him pushing a person to the ground, grabbing his neck, and kicking him, and the following day pushing a shoplifter so hard they fell to the floor.
John Lewis investigated promptly, held disciplinary hearings, and considered the claimant's explanation of self-defence. The tribunal found that the employer genuinely believed the claimant had committed gross misconduct and that the investigation was reasonable. The dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses that a reasonable employer might adopt.
What the losing side could have done differently
The claimant argued that his actions were caused by his migraines and PTSD, but the tribunal found no evidence linking his conduct to his migraines. His PTSD claim failed because the condition did not meet the legal threshold of a disability under the Equality Act 2010 – it had not lasted 12 months and was not likely to recur. The claimant also represented himself, which made it harder to present complex legal arguments. A stronger case might have required medical evidence showing a direct causal link between his disability and the specific incidents.
Why the result matters for similar claims
This decision confirms that employers are not expected to tolerate physical violence, even from long-serving employees with health conditions. It also reinforces that the 'range of reasonable responses' test gives employers considerable leeway in misconduct cases. For employees, it highlights the importance of obtaining timely medical evidence and legal representation when bringing discrimination claims. The tribunal's rejection of the PTSD disability claim also shows that not every mental health condition will meet the legal definition – the effects must be substantial and long-term.
Similar cases
Porter dismissed for pushing security guard: zero-tolerance policy upheld
A hospital porter with nine years' service was fairly dismissed for pushing a security guard who challenged him for not wearing a face mask. The tribunal upheld the employer's decision, finding the dismissal within the range of reasonable responses.
Warehouse picker dismissed for lifting trolley in horseplay: dismissal fair despite long service
A warehouse picker with nine years' service was fairly dismissed for lifting an empty trolley to chest height as an act of horseplay. The tribunal upheld the employer's decision, finding it within the band of reasonable responses.
Sales advisor dismissed for fraudulent signatures: employer's investigation was reasonable
A sales advisor with 9 years' service was dismissed for gross misconduct after an Insight Report flagged suspicious customer signatures. The tribunal found the employer's investigation and decision to dismiss were within the band of reasonable responses.
Bus driver dismissed after driving onto pavement to overtake: dismissal fair
A bus driver with 13 years' service was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct after driving onto a pavement to overtake another bus. The tribunal rejected claims of race and religious discrimination.