Case 2500499/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Barnfather v Gentoo Group Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2500499/2022
- Decision date
- 25 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Moss REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Barnfather
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Moss heard the case at Newcastle by CVP on 24-25 August 2022. The claimant was Mr G Barnfather and the respondent was Gentoo Group Limited. The tribunal recorded that the hearing was remote because of the Covid-19 pandemic.
The tribunal held that the claimant’s unfair dismissal claim was well founded and succeeded. It also held that the claimant’s claim for breach of contract, described in the judgment as wrongful dismissal, was not well founded and was dismissed.
The judgment records that the respondent agreed to pay the claimant the net sum of £14,823.03. The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days, so the extracted judgment does not set out the tribunal’s detailed reasoning or any split of the agreed sum between claims.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment identifies this as a claim for breach of contract (wrongful dismissal). | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £14,823
- across all upheld claims
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.