Case 1403443/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Dr Martin Parsons v Barnabas Fund — 2020
- Case reference
- 1403443/2019
- Decision date
- 5 August 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge J Bax Representation
- Venue
- Bristol
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Dr Martin Parsons
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the Bristol Employment Tribunal hearing on 3, 4 and 5 August 2020, before Employment Judge J Bax, the tribunal held that Barnabas Fund automatically unfairly dismissed Dr Martin Parsons. The tribunal also recorded that the Claimant's claims under section 47B of the Employment Rights Act 1996 succeeded.
The judgment was a short oral reasons decision and does not set out the underlying findings of fact or any separate remedy calculation. It states that directions will be given for remedy under a separate order, so no monetary award is recorded in this judgment itself. Written reasons were not to be provided unless requested within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found that the Respondent automatically unfairly dismissed the Claimant. Remedy was left to a separate order. | Upheld | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The Claimant's claims under section 47B of the Employment Rights Act 1996 succeeded. Directions for remedy were to follow in a separate order. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.47B ERA 1996
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.