Case 1600869/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S Barbour v Marks and Spencer plc — 2020
- Case reference
- 1600869/2019
- Decision date
- 19 November 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Havard
- Venue
- Cardiff via CVP
- Panel members
- Ms H Hinkin, Ms J Southall
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms S Barbour
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal unanimously dismissed all of Ms Barbour's claims against Marks and Spencer PLC. It found that the unfair dismissal claim under section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was not well-founded.
The Tribunal also dismissed the direct race discrimination claim under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 and the harassment related to race claim under section 26 of the Equality Act 2010, finding each was not well-founded. The breach of contract and notice pay claim was also dismissed as not well-founded.
The judgment records that reasons were given orally at the hearing. No written reasons are included in the judgment text, so the detailed factual findings and reasoning are not set out.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states the unfair dismissal claim pursuant to section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment states the direct discrimination claim on the grounds of race pursuant to section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | The judgment states the harassment claim related to race pursuant to section 26 of the Equality Act 2010 was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment describes this as a claim for breach of contract and notice pay, and states it was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 13 of the Equality Act 2010
- section 26 of the Equality Act 2010
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.