Case 2301352/2019 · Employment Tribunal

Ms C Barnes v Novoteam Ltd — 2019

Case reference: 2301352/2019
Decision date: 28 August 2019
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Hyams-Parish Date

Indexed: 22 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Ms C Barnes

Respondent

Novoteam Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

On 28 August 2019 Employment Judge Hyams-Parish entered judgment under Rule 21 in favour of Ms C Barnes against Novoteam Ltd. The judgment states that the claim succeeds.

The order also says that the hearing listed for 03 September 2019 will be converted to a 2 hour Remedy Hearing. No liability reasons, claim-by-claim findings, or monetary award are set out in the extracted judgment, so the remedy was left to be determined at that later hearing.

Claims and outcomes

5 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Breach of contract	Claim type inferred from the gov.uk listing; the extracted judgment itself only states that the claim succeeds under Rule 21.	Upheld	—	—
Race discrimination	Claim type inferred from the gov.uk listing; the extracted judgment itself only states that the claim succeeds under Rule 21.	Upheld	Race	—
Unfair dismissal	Claim type inferred from the gov.uk listing; the extracted judgment itself only states that the claim succeeds under Rule 21.	Upheld	—	—
Unlawful deduction from wages	Claim type inferred from the gov.uk listing; the extracted judgment itself only states that the claim succeeds under Rule 21.	Upheld	—	—
Working time regulations	Claim type inferred from the gov.uk listing; the extracted judgment itself only states that the claim succeeds under Rule 21.	Upheld	—	—

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.