Case 1405992/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Felicity Nicola Boase v Mrs Avril Plunkett — 2020
- Case reference
- 1405992/2019
- Decision date
- 2 June 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bax Representation
- Venue
- Bristol
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Felicity Nicola Boase
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a consent judgment heard at Bristol on 22 May 2020 before Employment Judge Bax. The tribunal revoked the earlier judgment of Employment Judge Roper dated 24 January 2020 so far as it related to breach of contract in respect of notice pay, and dismissed that claim by consent.
The claimant succeeded on the redundancy issue. The judgment states that Mrs Felicity Nicola Boase was entitled to a statutory redundancy payment, and the respondent, Mrs Avril Plunkett, was ordered to pay £2,277.45.
The claimant also succeeded on holiday pay. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the gross sum of £136.12 in respect of that claim. The judgment does not record any separate award for interest or other heads of loss beyond those two sums.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment records that the judgment of Employment Judge Roper dated 24 January 2020, in relation to breach of contract in respect of notice pay, was revoked and that claim was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | The claimant was found entitled to a statutory redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £2,277 |
| Working time regulations | The claimant succeeded in her holiday pay claim and was awarded the gross sum stated in the judgment. | Upheld | — | £136 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,414
- 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.