Case 2305984/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Angela Boas v Filton Brewery Products Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2305984/2023
- Decision date
- 12 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Aspinall Thursday
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Angela Boas
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge M Aspinall, sitting alone at London South Employment Tribunal on 12 December 2024, found that Mrs Angela Boas was constructively unfairly dismissed by the respondent Filton Brewery Products Ltd. All claims brought against Martin Hughes personally were dismissed, and a claim for breach of contract was also dismissed on the basis that it had not been brought as a separate head of claim.
The claimant was awarded a basic award of £1,223.04, compensation for loss of statutory rights of £500, and compensation for immediate financial losses of £4,510, producing a total award of £5,733.04. The respondent was ordered to pay these sums forthwith and in any event by 26 December 2024.
The judgment was given orally at the hearing and written reasons will not be provided unless requested by a party within 14 days. The PDF contains only the judgment and standard procedural notices; the tribunal's detailed reasoning is not set out in the written record provided.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Tribunal found the claimant was constructively unfairly dismissed by Filton Brewery Products Ltd. | Upheld | — | £5,733 |
| Breach of contract | Dismissed on the basis that it was not brought as a separate head of claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | All claims against Martin Hughes (named individually) were dismissed. Claim type not specified in the judgment text provided. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,733
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £1,223
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £4,510
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.