Case 2600734/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v NOVA Education Trust — 2023
- Case reference
- 2600734/2023
- Decision date
- 12 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ahmed Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Midlands East region of the Employment Tribunals on 5 April 2023. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, so Employment Judge Ahmed made a Rule 21 judgment on 12 June 2023.
The judgment states that the claim succeeds, but it does not set out substantive findings on the underlying merits of the pleaded heads of claim. No compensation figure is determined in the judgment itself.
The remedy is left to a separate remedy hearing listed for 21 August 2023 at 10.00am for two hours. The judgment records no award at this stage.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment does not list this head separately; it states only that the claim succeeds under Rule 21 after the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. | Upheld | — | — |
| Redundancy | The judgment does not list this head separately; it states only that the claim succeeds under Rule 21 after the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment does not list this head separately; it states only that the claim succeeds under Rule 21 after the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.