Case 1309208/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Finch, wife v Respondent — 2022
- Case reference
- 1309208/2020
- Decision date
- 9 March 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Broughton
- Venue
- Birmingham
- Panel members
- Mrs R Forrest, Mr J Sharma
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mrs L Finch, wife
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Birmingham by CVP on 7 to 9 March 2022, Employment Judge Broughton sat with Mrs R Forrest and Mr J Sharma. The tribunal heard Mr N Finch's claims against Rapscraft Limited. The claimant was represented by his wife, Mrs L Finch, and the respondent was represented by counsel Mr D Bunting.
The tribunal dismissed the claims of unfair dismissal, failure to provide rest breaks, and indirect disability discrimination. It upheld the breach of contract claim for unpaid wages and holiday pay. The judgment records that the breach of contract award was by consent and fixed at £956.13 gross, with no separate breakdown given in the text.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | Failure to provide rest breaks. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Indirect disability discrimination. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Breach of contract | Unpaid wages / holiday; awarded by consent as a gross sum. | Upheld | — | £956 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £956
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.