Case 2201840/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Ms C Blesovsky v Api. Video SAS — 2025
- Case reference
- 2201840/2025
- Decision date
- 4 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Moyler REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms C Blesovsky
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought complaints of breach of contract against Api. Video SAS, which did not attend the hearing held by CVP at London Central on 4 September 2025 before Employment Judge Moyler. The tribunal found that the complaint of breach of contract in relation to notice pay was well-founded, holding that the claimant had not committed a repudiatory breach of contract that would have justified her summary dismissal, and that she was entitled to notice pay of £25,000.
The tribunal also found well-founded a further breach of contract complaint relating to a Settlement Payment of £20,000 set out in the 'clause for financial protection' that applied to the claimant's employment contract with effect from 1 July 2024.
By way of remedy, the respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £25,000 as damages for breach of contract, reflecting the statutory limit imposed on the tribunal by article 10 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994. The figure was calculated using gross pay to reflect the likelihood that the claimant would have to pay tax on it as Post Employment Notice Pay.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Complaint of breach of contract in relation to notice pay. Tribunal found the claimant did not commit a repudiatory breach justifying summary dismissal and was entitled to notice pay of £25,000. | Upheld | — | £25,000 |
| Breach of contract | Complaint of breach of contract in relation to a Settlement Payment of £20,000 under the 'clause for financial protection' applying to the claimant's contract from 1 July 2024. Found well-founded; the judgment did not allocate a separate award to this claim, with the total damages capped at the £25,000 statutory limit. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £25,000
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- article 10 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994
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.