Case 3302910/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs J Noakes v Hertfordshire County Council — 2019
- Case reference
- 3302910/2018
- Decision date
- 25 July 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brown
- Venue
- Cambridge
- Panel members
- Mr D Hart, Dr S Gamwell
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs J Noakes
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs J Noakes brought complaints against Hertfordshire County Council in the Employment Tribunal at Cambridge, with the hearing also sitting at Bury St Edmunds. The tribunal was constituted by Employment Judge Brown, with Mr D Hart and Dr S Gamwell as members.
The written judgment records that the claimant's complaints were not well-founded and were therefore dismissed. The extracted decision does not set out separate findings for each individual claim, and it does not record any monetary award.
The record states that reasons were given orally on 25 July 2019. It also states that written reasons would not be provided unless a written request was made within 14 days of the sending of the written record of the decision.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment record does not separate the complaints by claim type or give individual reasons; it states only that the claimant's complaints were not well-founded and were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The written record does not set out separate findings for each complaint; the overall complaints were dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Race discrimination | The written record does not set out separate findings for each complaint; the overall complaints were dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | Race | — |
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.