Case 3203103/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Barker v Tesco Maintenance Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 3203103/2019
- Decision date
- 4 May 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gardiner Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Barker
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal entered judgment for Mr J Barker on his claims for unfair dismissal, notice pay and holiday pay under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013. The basis recorded was that Tesco Maintenance Limited failed to present a response to the Tribunal office as required by Rule 16.
The judgment did not determine compensation. It stated that the Tribunal would give directions for determining the remedy due to the claimant at the hearing listed on 13 May 2020. No award figures were recorded in this decision.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Judgment entered for the claimant under Rule 21 because the respondent failed to present a response. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Notice pay was included in the claimant's judgment under Rule 21; remedy was left to a later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Holiday pay was included in the claimant's judgment under Rule 21; remedy was left to a later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 21 Employment Tribunal Rules 2013
- Rule 16 Employment Tribunal Rules 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.