Case 3301355/2021 · Employment Tribunal

Mrs G Baker v Bartco Ltd — 2023

Case reference: 3301355/2021
Decision date: 14 September 2023
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Shastri-Hurst
Venue: Reading
Panel members: Mrs A Brown, Ms H Edwards

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mrs G Baker

Respondent

Bartco Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal heard Mrs G Baker's claims against Bartco Ltd at Reading on 11 to 14 September 2023 before Employment Judge Shastri-Hurst, Mrs A Brown and Ms H Edwards. The written judgment records the representation for each side and then sets out the tribunal's decisions on the claims.

The tribunal found that the claimant's unfair dismissal claim was well-founded and succeeded. It found that the sex discrimination claim was not well-founded and failed. It also found that the claim for unauthorised deduction of wages was not well-founded and failed.

The supplied written record does not set out the tribunal's reasoning in detail. It states that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons will not be provided unless a request was made at the hearing or a written request is submitted within 14 days of the decision being sent to the parties. No monetary award is recorded in the supplied text.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	Recorded from the judgment.	Upheld	—	—
Sex discrimination	The written record states only the outcome. It also notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested, so no further findings are set out in the supplied text.	Dismissed	Sex	—
Unlawful deduction from wages	The written record states only the outcome. It also notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested, so no further findings are set out in the supplied text.	Dismissed	—	—

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.